fO 


0 
0 
0 

6 

1 
1 

3j 


ORATION 


D  F.  L  I  V  K  R  E  O      I!  E  F  O  I!  K      T  II  K 


MUNICIPAL    AUTHORITIES 


OF    THE    CITY    OF    BOSTON, 


JULY    4,    1859, 


BY  GEORGE  SUMNER. 


THIRD     EDITION. 


BOSTON 


M  IX  CC  MX. 


c 


ORATION. 


O  E  ATI  O  ]sr 


DELIVERED      BEFORE       I'll' 


MUNICIPAL    AUTHORITIES 


OF    THE    CITY    OF    BOSTON, 


JULY    4,    1859, 


BY  GEORGE  SUMNER. 


THIRD    EDITION. 


BOSTON: 
T  I  C  K  1ST  O  R     .A.  N"  D      IF1  I  E  H.  I>  S. 

M  DCCC  LIX. 


GKO.  C.  RAND  &  AVKHY,  rrinti-rs.  '•'•  Cornhill.  Mostou. 


CITY     OF     BOSTON. 


In  Common   Council,  July  21,  1859. 

ORDERED  :  That  the  thanks  of  the  City  Council  be,  and  they  hereby 
are  presented  to  GEORGE  SUMNER,  Esq.,  for  the  eloquent  Oration 
by  him  delivered  before  the  Municipal  Authorities  on  the  occasion 
of  the  Celebration  of  the  Eighty-Third  Anniversary  of  the  Declar- 
ation of  American  Independence,  and  that  a  copy  of  said  Oration  be 
requested  for  publication. 

Sent  up  for  concurrence. 

J.   P.   BRADLEE,  President. 

In  Board  of  Aldermen,  July  iJ5,  1859. 
Passed  in  concurrence. 

SILAS  PEIRCE,    Chairman. 

Approved,  July  '27,  1859. 

F.  W.  LINCOLN,  JR.,  Mayor. 


PREFACE. 


HONORED  by  the  request  of  the  City  Council  to  speak,  in 
the  name  of  Boston,  on  the  Fourth  of  July,  it  seemed  to 
me  proper  on  that  occasion  to  discuss  some  of  our  obliga- 
tions, as  Americans,  to  other  nations  and  to  ourselves. 

The  facts  then  stated,  which  bear  upon  the  aid  given 
our  country  in  its  Revolutionary  struggle,  were  verified  by 
the  examination  of  original  documents  in  the  archives  of 
the  State  Department  at  Washington,  of  the  French  Minis- 
try of  Foreign  Affairs  at  Paris,  and  of  the  Spanish  govern- 
ment at  Seville  and  Madrid;  and  also  of  papers  in  the 
hands  of  the  executor  of  Caron  de  Beaumarchais,  the 
agent  of  the  first  benefactions  of  France.* 

In  giving  to  Spain  the  credit  of  having  projected  the 
Armed  Neutrality  of  1780,  I  am  aware  that  I  may  seem 
to  have  differed  from  many  writers  on  International  Law. 
The  statement,  however,  was  not  lightly  made,  nor  without 
documentary  evidence  to  sustain  it. 

*  As  the  recent  biographer  of  Beaumarchais,  M.  de  Lomenie,  has  charged 
the  United  States  with  ingratitude  to  him,  I  take  this  opportunity  publicly 
to  state,  that  having  drawn  the  attention  of  his  executor  to  the  first  ac- 
cusations of  M.  de  Lomenie,  in  the  Revue  den  Deux  Mondes,  that  gentleman 
declared  to  me,  that  every  just  claim  of  Beaumarchias  had  been  "  fully, 
largely,  and  generously  paid  by  the  United  States ;  "  and  this  declaration  he 
offered  to  repeat,  in  his  official  capacity,  before  a  Notary  Public. 


Of  what  was  said  concerning  the  position  of  European 
countries,  I  have  nothing  to  alter  on  account  of  the  truce 
of  Villafranca. 

As  regards  recent  events  in  our  own  country,  speaking  in 
the  name  of  a  law-abiding  people,  I  felt  it  my  duty  to  raise  a 
warning  voice  against  conduct  which  the  wisest  jurists  in  the 
land  have  denounced,  as  tending  to  bring  the  tribunals  of  the 
law  into  disrespect.  Speaking  in  the  name  of  those  whose 
ancestors  made  sacrifices  to  secure  liberty  founded  on  law— 
and  who  believe  an  essential  guaranty  of  that  liberty  to  con- 
sist ^in  the  separation  of  the  legislative,  executive  and  judicial 
functions — I  should  have  been  recreant  to  my  trust  did  I  fail 
to  speak  of  acts  which  tended,  if  not  to  confound  those  func- 
tions, at  least  to  destroy  their  harmonious  balance.  Venera- 
ting the  Constitution,  I  could  not  stand  dumb  in  presence  of  the 
earnest  appeal  of  the  Senior  Judge  of  the  Supreme  Court— 
the  companion  upon  the  bench  of  Marshall  —  Mr.  Justice 
McLean,  who,  alarmed  at  the  usurpations  of  the  Chief 
Justice,  and  other  of  his  junior  colleagues,  exclaimed  in  the 
Dred  Scott  case :  "  Have  the  impressive  lessons  of  practical 
wisdom  become  lost  to  the  present  generation  ?  If  the  great 
and  fundamental  principles  of  our  Government  are  never  to  be 
settled,  there  can  be  no  lasting  prosperity.  The  Constitution 
will  become  a  floating  waif  on  the  billows  of  popular  excite- 
ment." Yielding  to  no  one  in  respect  for  our  judicial  sys- 
tem—  and  keenly  alive  to  the  importance  of  that  respect  being 
universal — I  felt  it  my  duty  to  invoke  the  supreme  tribunal  of 
the  land — the  Sovereign  Public  Opinion  of  the  country — to 
aid  in  awakening  a  portion  of  the  Judiciary  to  a  sense 
of  self-respect  —  the  basis  of  respect  from  others. 


9 


Jefferson  in  a  letter  to  Edward  Livingston,  of  25th 
March,  1825.  says:  "Your  code  for  Louisiana  will  range 
your  name  with  the  sages  of  antiquity.  One  single  object 
will  entitle  you  to  the  endless  gratitude  of  society ;  that  of 
restraining  judges  from  usurping  legislation.  .  .  .  Expe- 
rience has  proved  that  impeachment  in  our  forms  is  com- 
pletely inefficient.  A  regard  for  reputation  and  the  judgment 
of  the  world,  may  sometimes  be  felt  where  conscience  is 
dormant,  or  indolence  inexcitable." 

Story  also  recognized  as  the  High  Court  of  Appeals  of 
our  country,  "  its  intelligence,  its  integrity,  its  learning 
and  its  manliness." 

In  addressing  myself  to  these,  I  followed  my  convictions 
of  duty;  being  true  to  which  I  felt  that  I  was  true  to  Bos- 
ton. —  I  was  happy  moreover  in  the  certainty  that  even  so 
humble  a  voice  as  my  own,  when  speaking  for  the  purity  and 
dignity  of  the  Judiciary,  had  the  cordial  support  of  the 
members  of  every  "  healthy  political  organization  "  in  the 
Republic.  G-.  S. 

BOSTON,  1st  August,  1859. 


ORATION. 


EIGHTY-THREE  years  have  passed  since  the  delegates 
of  thirteen  feeble  colonies  proclaimed  the  immortal 
truths  of  that  Declaration  to  which  we  have  just 
listened.  This  act,  pregnant  with  consequences  to 
all  mankind,  stands  in  history  as  the  record  of  the 
birth  of  a  new  nation. 

In  1776  the  great  powers  of  Europe  were  at 
peace,  and  England  was  at  full  liberty  to  throw  on 
our  shores  the  whole  force  of  her  arms. 

In  the  great  contest  which  ensued  —  a  contest  for 
self-government  and  for  the  equal  rights  of  man  — 
perils  were  encountered  and  sufferings  endured,  which 
we,  calmly  enjoying  their  fruits,  remember  with  grati- 
tude to  the  men  who  toiled  for  us,  and  with  fealty 
to  the  principles  which  they  proclaimed. 

The  struggle  was  long  and  unequal ;  and  when 
the  enemy  succeeded  in  gaining  possession  of  New 
York,  the  timid  began  to  falter.  All  eyes  were  now 
turned  to  Europe.  Delegates  had  been  already  de- 
spatched to  seek  the  assistance  of  France,  and  their 
hopes  were  not  disappointed.  One  million  of  francs 


12 


were  given  from  the  French  treasury ;  cannon  and 
military  stores  furnished  from  the  arsenals  of  France ; 
other  stores  to  the  value  of  a  million  of  dollars 
placed  in  colonial  ports  accessible  to  our  vessels ; 
and  a  series  of  friendly  acts  commenced  which,  on 
the  6th  of  February,  1778,  were  consummated  in  u 
treaty  of  alliance,  and  in  a  declaration  by  which 
France  bound  herself  to  make  no  peace  with  Eng- 
land until  the  independence  of  the  United  States 
was  fully  recognized. 

But  it  was  not  France  alone  which  came  to  our 
aid.  During  that  summer  of  '76,  one  of  those  brave 
men  who  were  the  creators  of  the  naval  glory  of 
our  country,  Captain  John  Lee,  of  Marblehead,  cruis- 
ing under  a  commission  from  Congress,  having  taken 
and  sent  home  five  valuable  prizes,  and  finding  it 
necessary  to  refit  and  obtain  supplies  and  munitions 
of  war,  entered  the  port  of  Bilbao  in  Spain.  The 
captains  of  two  of  his  prizes  and  a  part  of  their 
crews  were  on  board.  These  officers  immediately 
protested  against  their  capture,  and  had  Capt.  Lee 
arrested  on  a  charge  of  piracy.  The  local  author- 
ities sent  the  documents  of  the  case  to  Madrid, 
together  with,  the  commission  granted  by  this  'new 
and  unknown  power.  Here  was  a  critical  juncture 
in  our  affairs.  On  the  decision  of  the  Spanish  Min- 
istry depended,  not  alone  the  fate  of  Capt.  Lee,  but 
whether  some  of  the  most  important  ports  in  Europe 


1. 


should  be  opened  or  closed  to  our  cruisers  and  pri- 
vateers. The  English  Minister  in  Spain  brought  all 
his  influence  to  bear  against  us.  At  this  moment 
the  Declaration  of  the  Fourth  of  July  reached  Madrid. 
The  complaint  against  Capt.  Lee  was  dismissed  ;  sup- 
plies for  his  ship,  and  aid  in  repairing  it  were  fur- 
nished ;  and  public  declaration  made  that  in  Spanish 
ports  the  new  flag  of  America  was  as  free  and  as 
welcome  as  was  the  old  and  haughty  flag  of  England.* 

This  open  act  of  friendship  had  been  preceded  by 
another.  On  the  27th  June,  1776,  the  Spanish  Min- 
ister of  Foreign  Affairs  sent  to  Count  Aranda,  Am- 
bassador of  Spain,  in  Paris,  one  million  francs,  as  a 
free  gift  for  the  American  Colonies ;  f  and  on  the 
llth  August  this  million  was  paid  over  to  the  agent, 
with  whom  Silas  Deane  and  Arthur  Lee,  as  delegates 
of  Congress,  were  in  treaty  for  the  shipment  of  arms 
and  supplies. 

But  this  was  not  all.  Cargoes  of  military  stores 
were  sent  to  us  from  Bilbao ;  then  the  hint  was 


*  Cooper,  in  his  JVara/  Hiatory  of  the  United  States,  seems  entirely  to 
have  overlooked  this  interesting  episode.  Captain  Lee  was  a  brother  of 
Colonel  William  Lee,  tor  many  years  Collector  of  Salem,  the  same  to 
whom  Washington  proposed  the  place  of  Adjutant  General  of  the  Rev- 
olutionary Army,  before  offering  it  to  Colonel  Timothy  Pickering.  Silas 
Deane,  in  his  despatch  of  17th  October,  1776,  to  the  Committee  of  Secret 
Correspondence  of  Congress,  erroneously  describes  Captain  Lee  as  of  New- 
buryport.  —  See  Diplomatic  Correspondence  of  the  Revolution;  vol.  I.,  p.  53. 

fl  have  seen  the  despatch  of  the  Marquis  of  Grimaldi  to  Count  Aranda, 
enclosing  this  draft  for  a  million  francs. 


14 


given  that  three  thousand  barrels  of  powder  stored 
at  New  Orleans  were  at  our  service ;  *  the  port  of 
Havana  was  opened  to  us  on  the  same  terms  as  to 

*  The  despatches  of  Oliver  Pollock,  the  agent  of  Congress  at  New 
Orleans  during  the  war,  which  are  in  the  archives  of  the  Department 
of  State  at  Washington,  throw  the  fullest  light  upon  what  was  done  by 
the  Spanish  Government  in  Louisiana. 

As  early  as  August,  1776,  a  cargo  of  powder  was  given  by  Governor 
Unzaga,  despatched  by  Pollock,  and  arrived  in  safety.  In  January, 
1777,  Don  Bernardo  de  Galvez  succeeded  Unzaga  as  governor.  "That 
worthy  nobleman,"  writes  Pollock,  "immediately  made  a  tender  of 
his  services,  and  gave  me  the  delightful  assurance  that  he  would  go 
every  possible  length  for  the  interest  of  Congress.  I  should  be  guilty  of 
injustice,  did  I  not  declare  that  this  generous  promise  was  honorably  ful- 
filled ;  and  I  should  belie  my  own  heart  if  I  did  not  on  this,  as  on  every 
other  proper  occasion,  express  my  grateful  sense  of  the  services  he  has 
rendered  to  the  United  States.  The  first  instance  of  them  was  retaliating 
the  seizure  of  an  American  schooner  in  the  lakes,  by  the  seizure  and  con- 
fiscation of  all  British  vessels  between  the  Balize  and  Manchac, 

and  by  an  assurance  that  the  port  of  New  Orleans  should  be  open  and  free 
to  American  commerce,  and  to  the  admission  and  sale  of  prizes  made  by 
their  cruisers." 

Pollock  not  only  sent  military  stores  presented  to  Congress  by  the 
Spanish  governor,  but  also  made  purchases  of  supplies  amounting  to 
$65,814,  for  the  State  of  Virginia,  and  sent  them  by  batteaux  to  different 
points  on  the  Ohio.  His  drafts,  authorized  by  Governor  Patrick  Henry, 
came  back  protested,  placing  him  in  the  greatest  embarrassment,  from  which 
he  was  generously  relieved  by  Don  Bernardo  de  Ottero,  the  Spanish  Treas- 
urer of  Louisiana. 

The  course  of  events  at  New  Orleans,  under  the  brilliant  young  gov- 
ernor, Bernardo  de  Galvez,  whose  name  a  city  of  the  United  States  now 
bears,  is  described  in  papers  in  the  Archivias  de  las  ImHas,  and  has  more 
than  the  interest  of  romance.  A  somewhat  tardy  recognition  of  his  aid 
to  us  is  found  in  a  despatch  written  by  order  of  Congress  on  the  21st 
November,  1781.  This  despatch,  signed  by  Robert  Morris,  addressed  to 
General  Don  Bernardo  de  Galvez,  says : 

"  I  am  directed  by  the  United  States  to  express  to  your  Excellency  the 
grateful  sense  they  entertain  of  your  early  efforts  in  their  favor.  Those 
generous  efforts  gave  them  so  favorable  an  impression  of  your  character  and 
that  of  your  nation,  that  they  hive  not  ceased  to  wish  for  an  intimate  con- 
nexion with  your  country." 


15 


France,  and  the  further  hint  given  that  if  an  Amer- 
ican ship  should  look  in  there  occasionally  it  would 
find  the  door  of  a  certain  magazine  open,  and  some- 
thing in  it  useful  to  the  Colonies. 

Nor  was  this  the  end  of  Spanish  favors.  Blankets 
for  ten  regiments  were  sent  as  a  present  to  Congress, 
through  John  Langdon,  of  Portsmouth ;  ship  loads 
of  stores  were  despatched  through  the  house  of  Gardo- 
qui,  at  Bilbao ;  and  when  John  Jay  appeared  at 
Madrid  as  Minister  of  the  new  States,  without  any 
provision  being  made  by  Congress  for  money  to  pay 
even  his  house  rent,  another  gift  of  $  150,000  was 
made  to  him  for  us. 

More  yet.  Though  the  declaration  in  regard  to  Capt. 
Lee  was  the  earliest  act  of  recognition  by  any  power 
except  France,  Spain  abstained  from  making  a  treaty 
with  our  Minister,  for  the  very  excellent  reason  that 
to  do  so  would  have  been  tantamount  to  a  declara- 
tion of  war  against  England,  for  which  she  was  not 
prepared.  But  that  eminent  man  who,  on  the  19th 
February,  1777,  took  the  reins  of  power  in  Spain, 
Florida  Blanca,  was  not  idle.  He  immediately  com- 
menced building  new  ships  and  arming  those  already 
built  —  the  annual  expenses  of  the  navy,  usually 
about  one  hundred  million  reals,  or  five  million 
dollars.,  were  suddenly  raised  to  twenty  million  dol- 
lars—  and,  in  the  spring  of  '79,  thirty-six  ships  of 
the  line,  mounting  more  guns  than  any  fleet  she 


16 


ever  had,  being  ready  for  sea,  she  declared  war 
against  England.  This  immense  fleet,  of  which  seven 
were  three-deckers,  of  100  to  120  guns,  (our  solitary 
three-decker,  the  Pennsylvania,  has  never  yet  got  to 
sea),  this  immense  fleet  joined  the  French  fleet, 
sailed  to  attack  the  common  enemy,  and  during  that 
and  the  succeeding  year  intercepted  the  troops  and 
supplies  which  had  been  sent  to  aid  in  our  conquest. 

Florida  Blanca  did  not  stop  here,  but,  while  en- 
gaged in  his  naval  preparations,  made  a  treaty  with 
the  Emperor  of  Morocco  which  closed  his  ports  to 
the  English.  He  also  opened  relations  with  Hyder 
AH  in  India,  and  fomented  the  war  which  that  pow- 
erful prince  maintained  against  England.  Benjamin 
Rush,  writing  shortly  after  to  General  Gates,  says, 
"Heaven  prosper  our  allies!  Hyder  Ali  is  the  stand- 
ing toast  at  my  table."  Florida  Blanca  did  not  rest 
content  with  this,  but  used  all  the  wiles  of  diplo- 
macy and  all  the  force  of  Spain,  to  make  difficulties 
for  England  in  every  part  of  the  globe.  When  we 
are  disposed  to  stretch  the  hand  of  covetousness 
toward  any  possession  of  now  weakened  Spain,  let  us 
remember  the  helping  hand  she  gave  to  us  in  our 
hour  of  suffering  and  of  peril. 

But  the  labors  of  Spain  did  not  end  with  this. 
England,  driven  to  desperation,  used  all  her  arts  to 
draw  the  northern  powers  into  her  alliance,  and 
with  Russia  succeeded  so  well  that  orders  were  issued 


17 


to  fit  out  fifteen  ships  of  the  line  at  Cronstadt,  and 
the  intimation  was  given  by  the  Empress  Catharine 
to  Sir  James  Harris,  afterwards  Lord  Malmesbury, 
that  this  fleet  would  soon  be  ready  to  aid  England 
in  her  contest.*  British  Ministers  announced  the  joy- 
ful fact,  and  one  of  their  journals,  even  before  the 
ice  was  open  in  the  Baltic,  declared  that  the  Russian 
fleet  had  already  arrived  at  Plymouth. 

In  one  week  all  this  was  changed;  and  there  sud- 
denly appeared  in  the  spring  of  1780,  the  important 
declaration  of  Russia  that  led  to  the  armed  neu- 
trality, which  has  been  called  by  writers  on  inter- 

*  On  the  5th  Nov.,  1779,  George  III.  wrote  to  the  Empress  Catharine: 
"  The  lively  interest  which  you  take  in  all  that  concerns  Great  Britain  de- 
mands my  thanks.  In  this,  as  on  so  many  other  occasions,  I  have  admired 
the  greatness  of  your  talents,  the  extent  of  your  knowledge,  and  the  no- 
bility of  your  sentiments.  .  .  .  The  designs  of  my  enemies  will  not 
escape  your  penetration.  .  .  .  The  use,  or  the  simple  show,  of  a  part 
of  your  naval  force,  would  restore  and  assure  the  repose  of  all  Europe  by 
dissipating  the  league  which  is  formed  against  me." 

On  the  llth  January,  1780,  "another  sop,"  (to  use  the  language  of  the 
third  Earl  Malmesbury,  in  vol.  I.,  p.  269,  of  his  grandfather's  writings,)  "  was 
given  to  the  empress."  On  the  19th  January,  Sir  James  Harris  handed  to 
Prince  Potemkin  a  memoir,  written  to  show  that,  should  the  allies  prevail 
against  England,  America  would  supply  France  with  hemp,  pitch,  timber, 
&c.,  to  the  detriment  of  Russian  trade. 

"  On  the  22d  February,  1 780,"  says  Harris,  "  Pi  ince  Potemkin  sent  for 
me,  and  with  an  impetuous  joy,  said,  '  I  heartily  congratulate  you;  orders  will 
be  given  to  arm  fifteen  ships  of  the  line  and  five  frigates ;  they  are  to  put 
to  sea  early  in  the  spring.  .  .  .  It  is  entirely  owing  to  what  you  have 
advanced.  .  .  .  Your  nation  may  consider  themselves  as  having 
twenty  ships  added  to  their  fleet.  ...  I  am  just  come  from  the  em- 
press ;  it  is  by  her  particular  orders  I  tell  it  to  you.'  He  ended  by  desiring 
me  to  despatch  my  messenger  immediately,  expressing  his  impatience  for 
this  event  being  known  in  London."  —  Malmesbury  ;  Dim-it  >•  nml  Corres- 
pondence, I.,  279. 


18 


national  law,  "the  charter  of  the  liberty  of  the 
seas."  By  this,  the  empress  declared  that  her  fleet 
was  fitted  out,  not  to  aid  England,  but  to  maintain 
the  principles,  that  free  ships  make  free  goods — 
that  the  neutral  flag  covers  enemies'  property  —  and 
that  no  blockade  which  was  not  maintained  by  an 
effective  force,  no  blockade  made  merely  by  the 
London  Gazette,  would  be  recognized  as  valid. 

John  Adams,  then  Minister  at  the  Hague,  saw  at 
once  the  whole  force  of  this  step,  and,  in  a  despatch 
to  Congress,  said:  "A  declaration  of  war  against  Eng- 
land, on  the  part  of  Russia,  could  not  have  been 
more  decisive,"  —  and  again,  "the  pretended  preem- 
inence of  the  British  flag  is  now  destroyed."  "Rus- 
sia now  will  never  take  part  with  England,  and  all 
the  maritime  powers  must  either  remain  neutral  or 
join  against  her." 

In  the  House  of  Lords  a  wail  of  despair  was 
set  up.  "I  shudder,"  said  the  Earl  of  Shelburne, 
"when  I  think  of  this  Russian  manifesto;  by  it  the 
independence  of  America  is  consummated;"*  and 

*  "  The  doctrine,"  said  Earl  Shelburne,  "  of  '  free  ships,  free  goods '  at 
once  destroyed  the  law  of  nations  as  it  had  remained  for  many  centuries ; 
but  that  was  not  all ;  it  must  terminate  in  the  ruin  of  Britain,  at  least  in  the 
overthrow  of  her  naval  power.  ...  If  France  and  Spain  could  trans- 
I>ort  their  property  to  and  from  the  western  world  in  free  because  neutral 
bottoms,  it  was  to  the  last  degree  ridiculous  to  say  or  believe  that  Great 
Britain  could  possibly  be  able  to  cope  with  the  united  force  of  the  House  of 
Bourbon.  .  .  .  Then  farewell  for  ever  to  the  naval  power  and  glory  of 
Great  Britain  !  "  —  Parliamentary  History,  XXI.,  629  et  seq. 


19 


Lord  Camden  declared  that  "the  queen  of  the  seas 
was  deposed,  and  her  sceptre  fallen!" 

Desperate  efforts  were  made  by  British  Ministers 
to  meet  the  emergency.  Appeals  were  addressed 
to  Denmark  and  Sweden,  but  without  effect;  and, 
during  this  year,  1780,  Sweden,  Denmark  and  Hol- 
land joined  in  the  league  with  Russia,  which  was 
in  its  effects  a  league  of  hostility  to  England.  Hol- 
land also  soon  joined  in  the  war;  so  that  on  one 
side  stood  England  unaided  and  alone, —  on  the  other, 
using  all  their  forces  against  her,  the  United  States, 
France,  Spain,  Hyder  Ali,  Holland ;  while  all  the 
northern  powers  were  armed,  nominally  neutral,  but 
really  hostile  to  her  autocratic  pretensions. 

One  of  our  wisest  statesmen,  John  Adams,  ex- 
claimed a  few  years  later:  "We  owe  the  blessings 
of  peace  not  to  the  causes  assigned,  but  to  the  armed 
neutrality."  And  who  was  the  real  author  of  the 
armed  neutrality?  Who  conceived  that  act,  and  who, 
by  his  ingenuity  and  indefatigable  perseverance,  led 
Russia  and  with  her  the  northern  powers  to  adopt 
it? — Florida  Blanca,  the  Minister  of  Spain.  And  to 
him  and  to  his  country,  I  here  render  the  honor, 
with  all  the  more  pleasure  that  this  has  not  usually 
been  done,  and  that  the  documents  which  establish 
their  claim  to  it  are  in  my  possession. 

For  such  aid  as  the  armed  neutrality  gave  us — 
again  we  have  to  thank  Spain. 


20 


With  all  this  inequality  of  force  the  war  still 
went  on.  Constant  efforts  were  made  by  England 
to  induce  the  Colonies  to  return  to  their  allegiance; 
and,  to  their  shame  be  it  said,  men  were  found  ready 
to  listen  to  her  propositions ;  men  who  seduced  by 
the  hope  of  rewards,  and  by  the  promise  of  office 
for  themselves  or  for  their  sons,  consented  to  sneer 
at  and  to  deny  the  principles  of  the  Declaration.  It 
was  after  intercourse  with  such  men,  that  the  intelli- 
gent agent  of  one  of  our  allies  wrote  home  to  his 
government  that  there  was  more  real  enthusiasm  for 
American  liberty  in  the  smallest  cafe  in  Paris,  than 
in  a  large  portion  of  the  society  which  he  met. 

Again  and  again  were  terms  offered  by  England 
to  Spain  and  to  France,  but  the  constant  reply  was, 
a  refusal  to  treat  until  we  were  free. 

Peace  and  freedom  were  at  length  secured;  and 
from  that  time,  through  various  vicissitudes  and  diffi- 
culties, our  country,  —  by  confidence  in  democratic 
principles,  by  faith  in  the  people,  and  by  the  spirit 
of  mutual  forbearance  and  charity  among  them, — has 
gone  on  prospering  and  increasing,  till  in  material 
force  it  stands  among  the  mightiest;  and,  did  we 
but  always  act  up  to  the  immortal  truths  of  the 
Declaration,  would,  in  moral  force,  be  the  mightiest 
of  the  earth. 


21 


While  the  old  world,  to  which  we  turned  for  suc- 
cor against  our  unnatural  parent,  is  echoing  to  the 
clang  of  arms,  and  hostile  legions  stand  arrayed  for 
combat, 

"  We  may  live  securely  in  our  towns ; 

We  may  sit 

Under  our  vines  and  make  the  miseries 
Of   other  nations  a  discourse  for  us, 
And  lend   them   sorrows; — for  ourselves,  we  may 
Safely  forget  there  are  such  things  as  tears." 

But  it  is  not  in  man  to  be  indifferent.  The  en- 
during sympathies  of  our  nature  demand  an  object ; 
and  besides,  our  early  ties  to  France  must  make  us 
feel  a  special  interest  in  her  actions  and  destiny. 
What,  then,  is  the  object  of  the  war  in  which  she  is 
engaged,  and  what  responsibility  have  we  in  the  con- 
test? 

The  actual  war  between  Italy  and  France  on  one 
side,  and  Austria  on  the  other,  is  but  the  continua- 
tion of  our  own  struggle  on  another  field  — the  strug- 
gle for  independence,  equal  rights  and  self-govern- 
ment. How  far  these  may  be  secured  by  the  present 
contest  is  very  uncertain ;  but  there  is  no  uncertainty 
in  this,  that  our  warmest  sympathies  are  due  to  all 
who  strive  for  them. 

In  the  present  case  these  sympathies  are  augmented 
by  a  remembrance  of  all  we  owe  to  Italy  —  that 
beautiful  country  which  the  Apennines  divide,  the 


22 


Alps  and  sea  surround  —  Italy,  which  has  given  us 
so  much  of  all  that  adorns  and  elevates  life ;  the 
home  of  art,  of  science,  of  medical  skill,  of  political 
knowledge;  of  Galileo,  Raffael,  Michael  Angelo,  of 
Fallopio  and  of  Volta;  the  land  which  in  modern 
times  has  given  us  the  earliest  epic  poet,  Dante ; 
the  great  lyric  poets,  Petrarch  and  Filicaia;  the 
earliest  novelist,  Boccacio ;  the  first  philosophical  his- 
torian, Machiavelli ;  and  the  founder  of  the  philosophy 
of  history,  Vico,  whose  great  mind  has  brought  to 
the  development  of  political  science  and  the  laws  of 
the  moral  world  the  same  precision  that  Galileo  had 
brought  to  those  of  the  material  world. 

To  Italy  we  owe  the  mariner's  compass,  the  bar- 
ometer, book-keeping,  the  telescope  applied  to  astron- 
omy, the  calculation  of  longitudes,  the  pendulum  as 
a  measure  of  time,  the  laws  of  hydraulics,  the  rules 
of  navigation :  and  to  Italy  we  owe  both  Columbus, 
who  discovered,  and  Amerigo  Vespucci,  who  gave 
his  name  to  our  country. 

To  Italy  we  owe  also  some  of  the  most  important 
lessons  of  political  philosophy.  Her  Republics  of  the 
middle  ages  were  based  on  the  three  great  principles : 

1st.  That  all  authority  over  the  people  emanates 
from  the  people. 

2d.  That  power  should  return  at  stated  intervals 
to  the  people. 


23 


3d.  That  the  holder  of  power  should  be  strictly  re- 
sponsible to  the  people  for  its  use.* 

To  those  Republics  we  also  owe  the  practical  de- 
monstration of  the  great  truth,  that  no  State  can 
long  prosper  or  exist  where  intelligent  labor  is  not 
held  in  honor,  and  that  labor  cannot  be  honorable 
where  it  is  not  free. 

Our  sympathies  are  augmented  by  a  remembrance 
of  all  this,  and  by  the  natural  horror  inspired  by 
Austria  —  to  whom  civilization  for  three  hundred  and 
thirty  years  owes  nothing,  —  whose  whole  career,  both 
at  home  and  abroad,  has  been  a  series  of  blackest 
crimes  against  the  political  rights  of  States,  and  the 
individual  rights  of  man,  —  and  who  is  now  under  the 
despotic  control  of  an  emperor,  himself  a  deplorable 
example  of  the  union  of  youth  and  cruelty. 

But  there  are  some,  happily  their  number  is  small, 
who,  having  no  faith  in  the  people,  look  with  indiffer- 
ence upon  their  efforts, — and  others  who  try  to  cloak 
the  selfishness  and  imbecility  with  which  nature  has 
endowed  them,  under  an  assumed  superiority  over 
the  people  of  other  countries,  —  who  tell  us  that 

* "  The  whole  system  of  Italian  liberty  is  represented  in  these  three 
axioms.  In  fact,  the  Italian  republics  were  freer  than  those  of  Germany, 
than  the  imperial  and  Hanseati.?  cities,  than  the  Swiss  Cantons,  than  the 
United  Provinces,  perhaps  even  than  the  republics  of  antiquity.  All  these 
had  sought,  not  the  security,  but  the  sovereignty  of  the  citizens;  not  to  pro- 
tect the  citizen  against  the  government,  but  to  create  a  government  to  the 
power  of  which,  with  a  blind  and  unlimited  confidence,  they  neglected  to 
fix  any  bounds." — Sismondi,  Hitloire  rks  Republitjuea  Italiennes,  XVI.,  394. 


24 


other  nations  are  not  fitted  for  free  institutions,  —  who 
seem  to  think  that  they  have  a  patent  for  freedom, 
and  an  exclusive  right  to  enjoy  it,  —  that  they  are 
God's  chosen  people,  and  that  all  others  are  made 
only  to  be  ruled  by  tyrants. 

Others,  again,  who  have  a  sense  of  natural  right, 
and  common  sense  besides,  but  whose  natures  are  not 
hopeful,  point  to  the  example  of  France,  and  in  her 
failures  to  maintain  a  stable  republican  government, 
find,  as  they  imagine,  the  justification  of  all  their 
misgivings.  As  the  events  now  passing  in  Italy  must 
produce  a  recoil  in  France,  and  as  the  power  of  self- 
government  in  Italians  will  by  some  be  judged  of  by 
that  exhibited  by  the  French,  it  may  be  well  to  look 
for  a  moment  at  this. 

It  is  only  stating  what  many  wise  French  writers 
have  admitted,  that  their  Revolution  of  1789  was 
brought  on  by  our  own.  Before  '76,  the  labors  of 
Fenelon,  Montesquieu,  Turgot,  and  other  French  phi- 
losophers, had  developed  ideas  upon  the  rights  of  man, 
and  the  science  of  government,  which,  to  this  day, 
stand  as  the  landmarks  of  an  advancing  civilization. 
They  had  all  asserted  the  natural  rights  of  man,  and 
all  recognized  that  nations  had  rights  flowing  directly 
from  these,  and  not  drawn  from  old  charters  or  from 
musty  parchments.  With  this  there  was,  on  their 
part,  a  large  and  generous  appreciation  of  the  rela- 


tions  which  should  subsist  between  different  coun- 
tries. 

Montesquieu  had  laid  down  the  proposition,  for 
which  he  is  sharply  attacked  by  Lord  Brougham,  that 
"the  whole  system  of  international  law  is  a  set  of  ob- 
vious corollaries  to  a  maxim  in  ethics  —  that  in  war 
nations  should  do  as  little  injury,  and  in  peace  as 
much  good  to  each  other,  as  is  consistent  with  their 
individual  safety." 

Turgot,  the  great  statesman,  whose  Latin  inscription 
for  a  memorial  of  Franklin*  has  been  adopted  by  the 
city  of  Boston  —  and  who  may  be  called  the  father 
of  free-trade  —  Turgot  had  labored  for  three  great 
objects  : 

1st.  To  check  religious  intolerance. 

2d.  To  reduce,  and  finally  suppress,  standing  armies. 

3d.  To  establish  free  trade. 

And  the  whole  political  code  of  this  hard-headed, 
practical  statesman  and  successful  financier,  may  be 
summed  up  in  his  declaration  that  "  when  called  upon 
to  decide  if  any  measure  were  useful  for  France,  the 

*  Turgot's  first  inscription  was  in  French  verse  : 

Le  voila  ce  mortel  dont  1'hcureuse  Industrie, 
Sut  enchainer  la  Foudre  et  lui  donner  des  loix, 
Dont  la  sapesse  active  et  1'eloquente  voix, 
D'un  pouvoir  oppresseur  aff  ranch!  t  sa  Patrie. 
Qui  desarma  les  Dieux,  qui  re"prime  kis  Rois. 
Which,  subsequently,  he  condensed  into  this  admirable  line : 
Eripuit  Ccelo  fulmen,  sceptrumque  Tyrannis. 

Oeuvres  de.  Turf/of,  IX.,  140. 
4 


question  must  first  be  asked,  Is  it  useful  for  all  man- 
kind? for  whatever  temporary  advantage  may  appear 
to  accrue  from  acting  on  a  different  principle,  noth- 
ing in  the  long  run  can  be  good  for  one  nation  which 
is  not  good  for  all." 

These  philosophers  turned  their  eyes  toward  Eng- 
land, as  then  offering  the  only  example  in  the 
world  of  a  certain  degree  of  liberty;  this  they  rec- 
ognized in  the  independence  of  her  judiciary  and 
in  the  grand  principles  —  fortunately  our  heritage  — 
which  guided  it.  The  words  of  Algernon  Sidney 
were  familiar  to  them :  "  Common  sense  declares  that 
governments  are  instituted,  and  judicatures  erected, 
for  the  obtaining  of  justice.  The  king's  bench  was 
not  established  that  the  chief  justice  should  have 
a  great  office,  but  that  the  oppressed  should  be  re- 
lieved, and  right  done.  The  honor  and  profit  he 
receives,  come  as  the  rewards  of  his  service,  if  he 
rightly  perform  his  duty."  And  again :  "  The  power 
with  which  the  judges  are  entrusted  is  but  of  a 
moderate  extent,  and  to  be  executed  bona  fide.  Pre- 
varications are  capital,  as  they  proved  to  Tresilian, 
Empson,  Dudley,  and  many  others."  * 

No  passage  from  Sidney  was  more  frequently  re- 
ferred to  than  this :  "  They  who  uphold  the  rightful 
power  of  a  just  magistracy,  encourage  virtue  and 

•Sidney;  Discourse*  on  Government,  chap,  iii,  sec.  26. 


27 


justice;  teach  men  what  they  ought  to  do,  suffer, 
or  expect  from  others;  fix  them  upon  principles  of 
honesty ;  and  generally  advance  everything  that  tends 
to  the  increase  of  the  valor,  strength,  greatness  and 
happiness  of  the  nation,  creating  a  good  union  among 
them,  and  bringing  every  man  to  an  exact  under- 
standing of  his  own  and  the  public  rights.  On  the 
other  side,  he  that  would  introduce  an  ill  magis- 
trate, make  one  evil  who  was  good,  or  preserve  him 
in  the  exercise  of  injustice  when  he  is  corrupted, 
must  always  open  the  way  for  him  by  vitiating  the 
people,  corrupting  their  manners,  destroying  the  val- 
idity of  oaths  and  contracts,  teaching  such  evasions, 
equivocations  and  frauds,  as  are  inconsistent  with  the 
thoughts  that  become  men  of  virtue  and  courage."* 
The  declaration  of  Chief  Justice  Lee  was  also  cited  by 
them  with  admiration  — "  One  rule  can  never  vary  in 
our  courts,  viz.,  the  Eternal  rule  of  Natural  Justice."f 
Montesquieu  had  shown  in  his  great  work  that 
the  separation  of  powers,  judicial,  executive  and  legis- 
lative, was  the  basis  of  all  free  government ;  and, 
acting  upon  this,  much  had  been  done,  even  before 
'89,  to  improve  the  administration  of  justice. 

*  Ibid,  chap,  iii,  sec.  20:  III.  129.  Edit.  1805. 

f  These  words  of  C.  J.  Lee  will  be  found  in  the  case  of  Oniyc/tund  v. 
Barker,  Atkyns's  Reports,  I.  46. 


28 


The  Constitution  of  '89  gave  to  France  self-govern- 
ment, and  recognized  the  sovereignty  of  the  people. 
No  honest  man  had  anything  to  fear  from  this  Con- 
stitution, but  all  who  lived  by  oppression  and  wrong 
were  filled  with  dismay.  The  Christian  doctrines  of 
Turgot  and  Montesquieu,  and  the  principle  that  gov- 
ernments were  made  for  men,  and  not  men  for  gov- 
ernments, shook  the  despotic  thrones  to  their  base. 
Their  trembling  occupants  conspired  at  Mantua  and 
Pilnitz,  and  formed  a  league  to  crush  the  constitutional 
government  of  France. 

In  August,  1792.  the  armies  of  despotism  arrived 
on  the  frontier,  threatening  to  overturn  that  govern- 
ment, and,  if  opposed,  to  reduce  Paris  to  ashes.  Then, 
in  the  fear  and  frenzy  which  ensued,  began  those 
acts  of  violence  which  have  left  a  stain  upon  the 
French  Revolution.  "  Nothing,"  says  one  of  the  most 
conservative  writers  upon  international  policy,  "  can 
ever  justify  one  State's  interfering  with  the  internal 
affairs  of  another;  and  the  worst  of  mischiefs  (the 
execution  of  those  who  have  aided  it)  must  ever  be 
the  result  of  such  interference ; "  and  it  is  to  this 
infamous  and  unprovoked  attempt  to  interfere  by 
arms  with  the  internal  affairs  of  France,  that  we 
must  trace  the  death  of  Louis  XVI.,  and  all  the 
violence  and  all  the  difficulties  which  followed  it. 

France  had  done  nothing  to  provoke  interference ; 


29 


and,  left  to  herself,  might  and  probably  would  have 
organized  and  sustained  a  good  government.  This 
assertion  I  boldly  make,  conscious  that  it  does  not 
accord  with  what  some  of  us  have  been  taught.  The 
enemies  of  liberty  have  not  scrupled  on  every  occa- 
sion to  distort  the  truth,  and  have  even  on  one  occa- 
sion found  an  accidental  ally  in  a  President  of  the 
United  States. 

Mr.  Millard  Fillmore,  in  the  last  annual  message  he 
sent  to  Congress,  says  that  France  showed  a  desire 
to  force  her  form  of  government  upon  all  the  world, 
and  points  to  a  decree  of  her  Convention,  declaring 
she  was  ready  to  succor  oppressed  nations  struggling 
for  liberty,  as  the  false  step  which  brought  against 
her  the  coalitions  and  armies  of  Europe.  Had  Mr. 
Fillmore  but  looked  at  the  facts,  he  would  have  found 
that  the  provocation  to  hostilities  came  not  from 
France,  but  from  the  despotic  confederates ;  and  that 
the  decree  in  question,  at  the  same  time  that  it 
showed  a  generous  spirit,  was  also  a  measure  of  self- 
defence.  The  Convention  of  Mantua  was  signed  20th 
May,  1791 ;  that  of  Pilnitz  the  29th  August,  1791 ; 
and  it  was  not  until  the  19th  November,  1792,  after 
the  actual  invasion  of  France,  and  eighteen  months 
after  the  first  coalition  against  her,  that  the  Con- 
vention voted  the  decree  which  President  Fillmore 
leads  us  to  infer  was  the  cause  of  that  invasion  and 


30 


of  that  coalition ;  the  cause,  in  presidential  logic, 
coming  eighteen  months  after  the  effect.* 

But  there  are  too  many  who  speak  of  France,  not 
with  any  accurate  knowledge  of  facts,  but  with  reck- 
less assertion,  and  a  seemingly  wilful  blindness  to  truth 
and  to  principle. 

This  is  not  the  place  for  long  dissertations,  but  a 
candid  examination  of  facts  will  show  that  the  French 
people  have  never  yet  had  a  fair  chance.  From  1792 
to  1830,  the  prolonged  pressure  upon  France  of  des- 
potic Europe,  under  the  lead  for  a  long  time  of 
England,  prevented  her  from  forming  a  good  govern- 
ment. The  revolution  of  1830  secured  the  rights  of 
only  240,000 ;  the  thirty-six  millions  of  Frenchmen 
being  declared  by  Guizot  to  be  no  part  of  the  K  lawful 
country."-)-  The  revolution  of  1848  made  of  these 
outlaws  citizens,  and  they  marked  their  possession  of 
power  by  securing  to  France  three  thousand  new 
school  houses  —  by  giving  her  cheap  postage — by 
making  all  bondmen  in  her  colonies  free — and  by 
placing  for  two  years  her  budget  in  equilibrium.  Dur- 
ing the  eighteen  years  of  Louis  Philippe's  reign  the 


*  A  statement  of  Lord  Brougham  has  led  many  persons  into  this  same 
historical  error.  "  The  famous  decree  of  19th  November,  1792,  was  a  main 
cause  of  the  dreadful  war  which  so  long  laid  Europe  waste,  and  overthrew 
so  many  established  governments."  —  Brougham  VIII.,  79.  But  the  invasion 
of  France  took  place  some  time  before  this  decree. 

t  "  Je  ne  connais  tjue  \e.  payx  l&yal.''  Guizot  —  Speech  in  the  Chamber  of 
Deputies. 


31 


expenses  had  been  every  year  fifty  million  dollars 
more  than  the  receipts,  while  under  Louis  Napoleon 
the  annual  deficit  has  been  upwards  of  one  hundred 
million  dollars.  To  the  Republican  government  of 
1848  belongs  the  exclusive  honor  of  having,  for  two 
years,  kept  its  cash  account  square. 

This  government  fell,  through  the  perjury  of  an 
usurper,  and  through  the  passive  obedience  of  a  stand- 
ing army  —  an  army  which  despotic  coalitions  had 
taught  France  to  regard  as  necessary  for  her  safety. 

Before  we  revile  the  French  people  for  having  per- 
mitted this  usurpation,  let  us  remember  that  it  was 
not  accomplished  without  a  bloody  resistance,  and 
that  the  people  in  the  provinces  showed  the  spirit  of 
self-government  which  was  in  them,  by  refusing  for 
a  long  time  to  submit  to  the  dictation  of  the  capital. 

Let  us  remember  also  that  our  own  Congress,  sit- 
ting in  Philadelphia,  wras  in  1783  assailed  by  armed 
invaders  of  its  Hall,  and  took  refuge  in  another  city. 

Let  us  again  remember  that  on  this  very  day,  three 
years  ago,  an  assembly  of  the  people  in  a  territory  of 
the  United  States,  peacefully  discussing  the  formation 
of  their  institutions,  was  dispersed  by  the  bayonets 
of  the  Federal  army. 

One  of  the  most  acute  and  learned  of  living  Ameri- 
can publicists  —  worthy  son  of  worthy  sires  —  Mr. 
Charles  Francis  Adams,  in  the  admirable  notes  to  the 
writings  of  his  grandfather,  suggests  the  single  legis- 


lative  assembly  as  one  great  cause  of  the  want  of 
stability  of  Republican  forms  in  France ;  and,  in  regard 
to  the  Italian  Republics  of  the  middle  ages,  he  alludes 
to  the  absence  of  a  respect  for  the  rights  of  the 
minority  as  one  of  the  latent  causes  of  their  down- 
fall. This  same  observation  upon  the  minority  has 
been  applied  by  others  to  France. 

It  may  not,  perhaps,  be  generally  known  that  the 
adoption  of  a  single  chamber  in  France  was  due,  in  a 
great  degree,  to  the  labors  of  our  own  philosopher  and 
statesman,  Franklin.  As  President  of  the  State  Con- 
vention of  Pennsylvania,  he  had  secured  the  adoption 
in  their  constitution  of  a  single  chamber — in  his 
writings  he  had  praised  it  —  and  the  Committee  of 
the  French  National  Assembly,  La  Rochefoucauld, 
Sieyes,  Mirabeau  and  others,  give  to  Franklin  the 
honor  of  having  aided  them,  as  they  say,  "  to  clear 
the  legislative  machine  of  its  multiplied  movements 
and  much  praised  balances,  which  made  it  only  com- 
plicated and  cumbersome ; "  and  this  opinion  of  Frank- 
lin was  also  relied  upon  in  the  adoption  of  the  Re- 
publican Constitution  of  1848.  While  admitting  the 
error  in  this,  we  may  surely  pardon  something  to 
those  who  have  been  led  astray  by  faith  in  our  own 
great  men. 

In  regard  to  the  rights  of  minorities,  every  revolu- 
tion in  France  has  shown  an  increasing  respect  for 
them  on  the  part  of  the  people ;  and  in  the  most 


33 


violent  popular  clubs  of  1848,  were  heard  words  like 
these  :  "  We  ask  no  exclusive  legislation  for  ourselves; 
on  the  contrary,  let  us  remember  always  to  guard  the 
rights  of  the  minority ;  as  the  law  of  civilized  States 
throws  its  tutelary  protection  with  special  force  over 
minors  and  wards,  so  let  us,  being  in  power,  remember 
that  the  defeated  minority  are  our  wards,  and  that  we 
are  their  responsible  guardians."  Compared  with  a 
sentiment  of  high  and  generous  statesmanship  like 
this,  coming  to  us  though  it  do  from  a  "  red-repub- 
lican "  club  in  Paris,  what  an  ignoble  contrast  is  pre- 
sented by  that  cry  of  demagogues  —  that  Indian  war- 
whoop  of  party  leaders — "to  the  victor  belong  the 
spoils." 

Under  all  recent  governments  in  France,  the  spirit 
of  inquiry  in  her  people  has  remained  ever  active, 
and  the  character  of  her  judiciary  generally  unspotted. 
The  reply  of  President  Seguier  to  an  improper  de- 
mand of  power  will  be  recalled :  "  The  court  renders 
judgments,  not  favors."  Under  the  first  Napoleon,  some 
of  the  courts,  it  is  true,  degenerated ;  but  the  Paris  bar 
has  punished,  by  remembering,  the  judge  whose  often 
repeated  formula  was :  Eempereur  a  dit,  et  je  vous  k 
repete  —  "  the  emperor  has  said,  and  I  repeat  it "  — 
and  one  of  the  declared  reasons  for  the  overthrow  of 
Napoleon  was,  that  he  had  "confounded  all  powers, 
and  destroyed  the  independence  of  the  judiciary."  * 

*  See  the  Senatus  Consultum  of  April,  1814,  Sec.  VII. 

5 


34 


Every  change  in  France  has  shown  a  higher  de- 
velopment, a  larger  education,  and  a  greater  power 
of  self-government  on  the  part  of  her  people.  It  has 
taken  England  some  six  hundred  years  to  bring  her 
parliamentary  machine  into  its  actual  state;  and  yet, 
only  four  years  ago,  the  husband  of  Queen  Victoria 
publicly  stated,  at  the  Trinity  House  dinner,  that  it 
must  be  regarded  as  still  on  trial.  Let  us  not,  then, 
question  the  capacity  of  the  French,  or  the  Italian,  or 
the  German  people,  simply  because  they  may  fail  to 
achieve  in  six  months  what  England  has  worked  upon 
for  six  centuries. 

But,  we  are  told  that  Italy  will  only  change  its 
master,  and  that  France  will  take  the  place  of  Aus- 
tria. It  is  not  the  interest  of  Louis  Napoleon  to  re- 
main in  Italy,  nor  is  it  possible,  under  any  circum- 
stances, for  France  to  degrade  herself  to  the  level  of 
Austria. 

The  career  of  the  elder  Napoleon  in  Italy,  which 
was  such  as  to  cause  his  name  to  be  still  revered 
there,  may  here  be  safely  appealed  to.  Industry  was 
awakened  and  encouraged,  schools  founded,  the  sci- 
ences stimulated,  and  academies  organized  by  him 
who  had  destroyed  them  in  Paris.  The  courts  were 
changed,  and  in  place  of  a  system  which  favored  and 
even  required  servile  and  corrupt  judges,  one  was 
installed  which  led  to  the  impartial  administration  of 


35 


justice.  The  armies  of  France,  under  Napoleon, 
brought  to  Italy  some  of  the  fruits  of  the  revolution 
of  '89.  If  the  worst  predictions  of  the  enemies  of 
the  war  should  be  fulfilled,  and  Italy  gain  by  it  only 
a  French  master,  it  would  still,  judging  by  the  past, 
be  a  change  from  darkness  to  light,  from  a  govern- 
ment of  the  most  loathsome  brutality  to  one  of 
comparative  civilization. 

And  here  let  me  say,  that  if  I  seem  to  speak 
harshly  of  the  Austrian  domination  in  Italy,  it  is 
because,  with  my  own  eyes,  I  have  seen  its  effects. 
I  will  not  sadden  this  day  by  the  recital  of  atroci- 
ties, the  remembrance  of  which,  even  at  this  dis- 
tance, chills  my  blood.  To  me  it  seems  incredible 
that  any  one  can  be  found  ready  to  defend  the  gov- 
ernment which  practises  them. 

Nor  has  Italy  received  anything  from  Austria  in 
exchange  for  all  her  sufferings.  The  well-made  roads, 
which  are  pointed  out  to  the  stranger,  were  nearly 
all  the  work  of  Italian  engineers  during  the  time  of 
Napoleon;  but  even  if  some  material  improvement 
had  been  made,  it  would  be  as  nothing  compared 
to  the  immense  amounts  Austria  has  drawn  from 
Lombardy,  by  forced  loans  and  by  crushing  taxation. 
About  fifty  per  cent,  of  the  revenue  of  land-owners 
goes  to  the  Austrian  treasury;  "and  all  we  get  in 
exchange,"  said  a  Lombard  to  me,  "is,  once  a  week, 
the  music  of  an  Austrian  regiment." 


36 


But  give  Italy  a  fair  chance.  Take  from  her  the 
incubus  of  Austria.  Take  away  those  bayonets,  with 
which,  through  a  blind  reverence  on  the  part  of 
other  States,  for  existing  abuses  and  the  balance  of 
power,  Austria  has  been  allowed  to  transpierce  her. 
"Let  the  thief  and  the  receiver,  the  murderer  and 
the  robber  be  no  longer  suffered  to  play  the  part  of 
watchmen"  in  Europe,  and  no  one  can  doubt  the 
result  for  Italy. 

It  does  not  follow  that  a  perfectly  balanced  gov- 
ernment will  leap  at  once  into  life.  Difficulties  of 
internal  organization  doubtless  will  arise.  Mazzini 
will  strive  for  a  united,  central  republic,  while  others 
will  be  glad  to  place  themselves  under  the  constitu- 
tional system,  which  has  developed  statesmen  like 
Cavour  and  Azeglio,  to  plan  their  wars  and  alliances, 
and  brave  captains  like  Victor  Emanuel,  to  lead 
their  armies.  These  differences  of  opinion  will  cre- 
ate discussion,  into  which,  perhaps,  excited  feeling 
will  sometimes  enter;  our  own  conventions  will  have 
set  them,  the  example;  but  to  all  prophets  of  evil 
it  is  sufficient  to  say,  that  the  Italian  people  have 
the  perfect  right  to  judge  of  their  own  institutions, 
and  if  they  find  pleasure  in  it,  to  wrangle  over  them. 
They  may,  perhaps,  think  that  nothing  is  so  good 
as  the  jar  of  a  constitutional  discussion  to  shake  up 
the  stagnant  elements  of  a  slumbering  society.  Look- 
ing from  a  distance,  if  we  might  venture  to  express 


37 


desires  upon  a  matter  which  exclusively  concerns 
the  Italian  people  themselves,  it  would  be  that,  with 
some  changes  in  the  actual  boundaries  of  States, 
representative  institutions,  securing  the  largest  lib- 
erty, should  be  founded  in  each  of  them,  and  a  cen- 
tral federative  government  be  created  to  administer 
such  powers  as  the  several  States  should  confide 
to  it. 

The  "  United  States  of  Italy "  thus  formed  would 
satisfy  the  love  of  unity,  so  strong  in  the  Italian 
heart,  while  the  State  organization  would  give  full 
play  to  that  spirit  of  local  and  municipal  liberty, 
which,  in  former  days,  was  so  fully  developed  in  the 
Italian  Republics. 

The  great  work  of  this  war  would  however  be 
very  imperfectly  done,  if  it  stopped  with  the  libera- 
tion of  Italy.  Already  in  1848,  the  unaided  Italians 
having  taken  Peschiera,  and  driven  Austria  behind 
the  walls  of  Yerona  and  Mantua,  which,  for  some 
time  to  come,  will  probably  be  her  stronghold,  she 
offered  to  treat  with  France  and  England  as  medi- 
ators for  the  surrender  of  Lombardy,  provided  the 
new  State  would  assume  a  portion  of  her  enormous 
debt. 

If  nothing  be  done  now  but  to  rescue  Italy,  and 
peace  be  then  made  with  Austria,  that  peace  can  be 
only  a  truce ;  for  we  may  expect,  in  a  short  time, 


38 


to  see  her  return    to  her  old   course,  and   again,  by 
her  outrages,  disturb  the  civilization  of  the  world. 

After  Italy  is  secured  to  freedom,  there  still  re- 
mains Hungary. 

This  country,  whose  constitution  goes  back  almost 
to  the  date  of  Magna  Charta,  and  which  had  pre- 
served its  political  independence,  though  exposed  to 
every  species  of  encroachment  from  the  Austrian 
archdukes,  whom,  in  an  evil  hour,  it  had  invited  to 
its  throne ;  this  country,  so  brave  and  so  unfortunate, 
merits  all  our  interest,  for  it  is  the  home  of  heroes, 
and  of  self-sacrificing,  honorable  men. 

Some  five  and  twenty  years  ago,  several  Hunga- 
rian noblemen  visited  the  United  States,  travelled 
throughout  the  country,  and  had  the  good  fortune 
in  Boston  to  form  an  intimacy  with  a  gentleman 
whose  views  upon  European  questions  were  as  en- 
lightened as  his  general  knowledge  was  varied  and 
profound  —  Mr.  Alexander  H.  Everett.  On  their  re- 
turn to  Hungary,  one  of  their  number,  Farkas  Sandor, 
published,  in  the  Magyar  tongue,  a  book  pointing  out  the 
working  of  our  institutions ;  and,  in  which  while  ren- 
dering thanks  to  Mr.  Everett  for  the  counsels  received, 
he  recommended  the  policy  of  the  Northern  States  as 
an  example  for  Hungary.  The  German  translation 
of  this  work  was  prohibited  by  Austria,  but  the  Hun- 


39 


garian  edition  had  already  gone  beyond  the  reach 
of  her  police.  The  effect  of  the  excursion  to  Amer- 
ica was  soon  apparent.  At  the  next  session  of  the 
Diet,  Baron  Wesselenyi,  Count  Bathjany,  and  others 
of  the  travellers  and  their  friends,  proposed  a  series 
of  measures  tending  to  the  abolition  of  those  feudal 
privileges  which  divided  the  Hungarian  people  into 
hostile  classes,  and  offered  at  once  to  lay  down 
their  titles  and  their  power  for  the  common  good. 

Austria  now  took  the  alarm.  She  had  always  pre- 
tended to  be  the  friend  of  the  peasants  against  the 
nobles,  —  but  when  the  nobles  proposed  to  give  up 
their  privileges  and  emancipate  the  serfs,  she  then 
used  all  her  power  to  oppose  them.  There  was  a 
deep  and  wicked  policy  in  this;  it  being  the  aim  of 
Austria  to  keep  up  such  a  hostility  between  classes, 
such  a  war  between  capital  and  labor,  that  she  might 
be  able  at  some  time  completely  to  subjugate  Hun- 
gary, by  calling  upon  the  peasants  to  cut  the  throats 
of  the  land-owners.  And  this,  in  the  spring  of  1846, 
she  actually  did,  in  the  neighboring  province  of 
Galicia. 

Shortly  after,  two  men  appeared  upon  the  scene, 
Count  Stephen  Sechenyi  and  Louis  Kossuth.  Se- 
chenyi  sought  the  advancement  of  Hungary  through 
material  improvements ;  Kossuth  sought  it  through 
the  education  of  the  people,  and  by  awakening  in 
the  minds  of  the  more  fortunate  classes  of  society 


40 


a  sense  of  their  duties.  By  securing  to  the  peas- 
ants the  right  of  voting  for  a  delegate  to  repre- 
sent their  villages  at  the  general  election, —  thus 
bringing  home  to  them  the  practice  of  free  insti- 
tutions, without,  however,  creating  such  a  mass  of 
new  voters  as  would  suddenly  disturb  the  general 
result, —  by  settling  the  eternal  question  of  capital 
and  labor,  and  making  the  holders  of  each  clearly 
understand  that  their  real  interests  are  reciprocal; 
by  these  and  kindred  measures  —  which  prepared 
the  way  for  that  larger  liberty  secured  to  all  classes 
during  the  constitutional  ministry  of  Kossuth  —  that 
eminent  orator  and  tribune  showed  himself  in  Hun- 
gary to  be  a  great,  practical,  conservative  statesman. 

The  Emperor  of  Austria  having  called  in  foreign 
troops  to  put  down  the  legal  government  of  Hun- 
gary, and  having  neglected  to  take  the  oath  of 
allegiance  to  her  Constitution,  which  the  compact 
between  the  Hungarian  nation  and  the  Dukes  of 
Austria  made  the  indispensable  preliminary  to  any 
act  of  sovereignty  on  his  part,  the  Diet,  in  the 
name  of  the  people  of  Hungary,  on  the  anniversary 
of  the  battle  of  Lexington,  1849,  declared  that  all 
connection  between  them  and  the  house  of  Austria 
was  dissolved. 

The  noble  struggle  made  by  the  Hungarian  peo- 
ple is  still  fresh  in  your  memories.  The  forces  of 
despotism  were  too  strong,  and  their  country  fell. 


41 


Had  any  other  State  recognized  their  independence, 
it  would  have  enabled  them  to  contract  a  loan,  and 
to  purchase  the  arms  necessary  for  the  contest.  Our 
own  Congress  was  unable  to  contract  any  loan  un- 
til our  independence  had  been  recognized  in  Europe. 
To  the  eternal  honor  of  Mr.  Clayton,  then  Secretary 
of  State,  a  commissioner  was  despatched  with  full 
powers  to  enter  into  negotiations  with  the  new  gov- 
ernment ;  but  he,  alas !  arrived  too  late. 

England  looked  calmly  on  while  a  government 
similar  to  her  own  was  destroyed  by  foreign  arms. 
Had  she,  in  the  summer  of  1849,  opened  relations 
with  the  constitutional  government  of  Hungary, 
which  she  could  have  done  without  shaking  any 
existing  right ;  without  even  giving  any  just  cause  of 
disturbance  to  "  those  finical  personages  who,"  in  the 
words  of  an  English  peer,  himself  a  negotiator,  "have 
brought  a  sort  of  ridicule  upon  the  name  of  diplo- 
macy;" had  she  then  taken  her  stand  upon  the 
Pragmatic  Sanction  of  1723,  and  upon  the  corona- 
tion oath  of  the  last  king  —  both  which  documents, 
duly  filed  away  in  red  tape  at  the  foreign  office, 
make  part  of  the  public  law  of  Europe,  and  by 
both  which  the  Austrian  sovereigns  recognize  the 
political  independence  of  Hungary  —  had  she  done 
this,  she  might  have  spared  herself  all  the  sacri- 
fices of  her  war  in  the  Crimea,  and  all  the  embar- 
rassments of  the  present  contest. 


42 


Then  there  might  have  been  at  the  present  mo- 
ment a  great  Constitutional  State,  on  the  banks  of 
the  Danube,  having  municipal  institutions  which  se- 
cured local  rights,  and  a  population  accustomed  to 
constitutional  forms,  and  to  liberty  founded  on  law. 
Here  would  have  been  a  nucleus  round  which  the 
different  provinces  of  Turkey  might  have  clustered, 
as  they  dropped  away  from  her  corrupt  body ;  and 
Hungary,  Transylvania,  Valachia,  Moldavia,  Servia, 
Bosnia,  and  Bulgaria  have  formed  the  "  United  States 
of  the  Danube,"  —  a  grateful  and  efficient  ally  for 
England.  But  the  blind  admiration  for  Austria  on 
the  part  of  the  English  aristocracy,  strengthened  by 
the  labors  of  Metternich,  then  in  London,  would  not 
permit  this  recognition. 

"  Of  all  the  subjects  which  can  come  before  the 
people  at  large,"  says  Lord  Brougham,  in  one  of 
his  political  essays,  "  the  foreign  policy  of  the  State 
is  the  one  on  which  they  the  least  deserve  to  be 
consulted.  Their  interests  are  most  materially  affected 
by  it,  no  doubt,  for  on  it  depends  the  great  ques- 
tion of  peace  or  war.  But  the  bearing  upon  their 
interests  of  any  particular  operation  is  far  from  being 
immediate,  and  a  measure  may  be  most  necessary 
for  securing  the  peace,  even  the  independence  of 
the  nation,  and  yet  its  connexion  with  these  great 
objects  be  far  too  remote  for  the  popular  eye  to 
reach  it."  * 

*  Thi?  was  written  in  1843.     See  Brougham's  Works,  VIII.,  93. 


43 


The  events  of  the  year  1849  in  England,  offer 
a  singular  commentary  upon  this  dogma  of  Lord 
Brougham.  Then  the  people  saw  clearly  the  inter- 
est of  England;  the  ruling  classes  did  not.  The 
people  flooded  the  House  of  Commons  with  petitions 
for  the  recognition  of  Hungarian  Independence ;  the 
aristocracy  remained  idle.  A  few  like  Lord  Lynd- 
hurst,  the  Marquis  of  Northampton,  and  the  lamented 
Earl  Fitzwilliam  were  true  to  themselves,  and  acted 
like  enlightened  English  noblemen,  but  the  greater 
part  stood  in  cold  indifference  to  Hungary,  or  joined 
the  sharers  in  Metternich's  Eaton-Square  dinners 
in  looking  with  delight  at  the  triumph  of  her  enemy 

And  what  is  this  Austrian  empire,  in  sympathy 
for  which  the  ruling  classes  of  England  forget  the 
interests  of  their  country  and  the  interests  of  hu- 
manity? An  agglomeration  of  States,  differing  in 
nationality,  language  and  religion,  brought  together 
by  fraud  and  violence,  and  held  by  brute  force,  in 
subjection  to  a  government  the  most  infamous  in 
history. 

Bohemia,  the  land  of  John  Huss  and  Jerome  of 
Prague,  was  annexed  after  a  series  of  atrocities  which 
make  the  Spanish  Inquisition  appear  respectable  in 
our  eyes.  Three  million  inhabitants  were  reduced 
to  seven  hundred  and  eighty  thousand,  and  of  thirty 
thousand  seven  hundred  villages,  only  six  thousand 
were  left  standing. 


44 


Excepting  the  Tyrol,  the  same  atrocities,  though 
in  less  degree,  have  been  practised  in  every  one  of 
the  different  States; — the  forces  drawn  from  all  being 
used  against  any  one  which  showed  a  spark  of  lib- 
erty. As  a  general  rule,  the  soldiers  of  each  State 
have  been  sent  to  distant  provinces,  of  the  language 
of  which  they  were  ignorant,  and  where  there  was 
little  probability  that  any  relations  would  spring  up 
to  weaken  the  blind  submission  imposed  on  them  by 
military  servitude.  Sometimes,  as  in  the  recent  bat- 
ties  in  Italy,  the  young  soldiers,  torn  by  her  con- 
scription from  the  soil,  have  been  placed  by  Austria 
in  the  front  rank,  and  fired  upon  from  behind,  if 
they  shrank  from  slaying  their  friends  and  deliverers. 

The  government  of  this  empire  has,  when  in  dan- 
ger, constantly  promised  reforms  in  the  provinces,  and 
as  steadily  opposed  reforms  when  the  danger  was 
passed.  Its  permanent  policy  has  been  to  keep  up  a 
state  of  endless  hostility  between  classes;  to  rule 
by  dividing,  by  making  appeals  to  the  most  anar- 
chical passions,  by  exciting  to  plunder,  and  even,  as 
in  Galicia,  to  assassination. 

This  government  is  not  an  aristocracy  of  virtue,  of 
talent,  of  birth  nor  of  wealth,  but  of  soldiers  and 
bureaucrats;  whose  practice  on  many  occasions  has 
been  the  development  of  the  principles  of  the  most 
exaggerated  communism.  Property  has  not  been 
respected  by  them  any  more  than  liberty ;  —  when- 


45 


ever  the  treasury  was  empty,  it  has   had   no  rights 
sacred  in  their  eyes. 

The  Austrian  government  has  not  scrupled,  over 
and  over  again,  to  repudiate  a  large  portion  of  its 
national  debt,  to  cut  down  to  one-half  their  nominal 
value  its  treasury  notes,  and  to  collect  forced  loans. 
All  Europe  would  have  rung  with  indignation  had 
any  of  these  deeds  been  done  by  a  liberal  government. 
The  culminating  outrage,  however,  of  Austria  upon 
the  rights  of  property  was  perpetrated  in  1852,  when 
the  emperor,  proclaiming  himself  the  guardian  of  all 
minor  orphans,  dispossessed  the  rightful  guardians 
and  trustees,  seized  upon  four  hundred  and  seventy 
million  dollars  —  the  heritage  of  the  fatherless  —  and 
gave  in  exchange  his  own  promises  to  pay. 

The  personal  violence  committed,  even  in  the  old 
German  provinces,  would  seem  almost  incredible  to 
one  who  had  not  himself  witnessed  it.  The  printed 
law  prohibits  the  flogging  of  women.  The  governor 
of  one  of  the  provinces,  with  whom  I  happened  to 
be  well  acquainted,  pointed  out  to  me  this  law,  which 
he  had  shown  a  few  days  before  to  an  English  noble- 
man who  admired  Austria.  "  Here,"  said  the  governor, 
showing  me  the  law,  "  is  the  text,  and  here,"  handing 
me  reports  from  the  police,  describing  the  flogging  of 
two  women  that  very  morning,  " here  is  the  sermon" 

One   of   the    greatest   sticklers  for   existing   States, 
and  upholders  of  the  actual  balance  of  power,  Lord 


4G 


Brougham,  speaking  of  the  partition  of  Poland,  has 
said,  "  It  would  not  be  easy  to  see  any  danger  arising 
to  the  North  American  Union  from  that  partition  in 
1793-4,  or  the  Holy  Alliance  in  1816  and  1820;  and 
yet  it  is  certain  that  the  Americans  had  a  right  to 
complain  of  such  acts  being  permitted,  because  the 
impunity  of  the  wrong-doers  gave  a  blow  to  the  polit- 
ical morality  of  all  nations,  and  lowered  the  tone  of 
public  principle.  The  United  States  were  interested 
like  all  other  countries,  in  seeing  that  the  principle  of 
National  Independence  was  held  sacred,  that  none 
could  conspire  against  it  with  impunity."  * 

If  this  be  true,  then  certainly  we  have  a  right  to 
protest  against  the  conduct  of  Austria,  which  is  a 
prolonged  violation  of  the  principles  of  national  in- 
dependence, and  of  political  and  private  morality ; 
and  since  it  is  now  clear  that  it  is  only  by  this  conduct 
that  she  lives  and  moves  and  has  her  being  —  that  her 
existence  hangs  upon  injustice  and  outrage  —  then, 
following  up  the  reasoning  of  our  statesman,  so  con- 
servative on  questions  of  foreign  policy,  we  have  a 
right  to  protest  against  the  very  existence  of  the 
Austrian  empire. 

Civilization  and  humanity  demand  that  this  wretched 
machine  of  cruelty  should  be  broken  up ;  that  this 
opprobrium  of  the  nineteenth  century  and  of  the 


*  Essay  on  General  Principles  of  Foreign  Policy.      Brougham's  Works. 
VIII.,  76. 


47 


human  race  should  be  resolved  into  its  elements  —  and 
the  so-called  emperor,  with  the  German  provinces, 
take  his  place,  an  humble  archduke,  in  the  German 
Confederation. 

Then  might  Galicia  and  Bohemia  resume  their 
position  with  the  Slavonic  family ;  then  would  Hun- 
gary become  again  free ;  and  then  Germany,  no 
longer  having  Austria  to  crush  her,  as  in  1850,  with 
the  forces  of  States  foreign  to  her,  might  awaken  to 
a  new  life,  and  found  a  government  in  which  liberty 
and  order  should  be  secured  by  making  the  German 
people  interested  in  their  maintenance ;  a  govern- 
ment in  which  her  men  of  science  should  take  their 
true  position,  which  should  not  condemn  to  death 
her  poets,  nor  cause  her  historians  to  pine  in  dun- 
geons *  —  which  should  not  force  her  Humboldts  to 
vote  with  the  opposition,  nor  drive  her  Bunsens  into 
political  exile.  Then  might  there  be  peace,  and  not 
merely  a  truce  in  Europe  ;  and  the  beneficent  plans 
of  Turgot  for  reducing  standing  armies  be  carried  out. 

But  the  great  obstacle  to  this  happy  consummation 
is  the  policy  which  the  ruling  classes  in  England  im- 
pose upon  her  government.  The  crimes  of  Austria 
may  be  traced  directly  home  to  England,  as  without 
the  moral  support  of  that  power  she  could  not  stand 
a  twelvemonth.  The  traditions  of  the  foreign  office, 

*  As  was  the  case  in  1850  with  the  poet  Kinkel,  and  with  the  Professor  of 
History  in  the  Heidelberg  University,  Gervinus. 


48 


and  of  the  governing  classes,  based  on  the  events  of 
a  hundred  and  fifty  years  ago,  point  to  the  house  of 
Austria  as  the  necessary  ally  of  England.  Scarce  one 
of  the  conditions  which  then  led  to  that  alliance 
exists  now.  Thus  it  is  ever  with  European  policy. 
Men  of  genius  conceive  a  system  appropriate  for  a 
given  series  of  facts ;  the  facts  change,  but  formalists, 
unable  to  appreciate  the  motive  of  the  system,  move  on 
in  the  old  track  to  their  own  perdition. 

{Cnowing  how  completely  her  existence  depended 
upon  the  favor  of  England,  Austria  has  used  all  her 
wiles  to  retain  it.  Weak  young  Englishmen  of  family, 
attracted  to  Vienna  by  its  cheap  and  facile  vices, 
have  been  "caressed  and  flattered.  On  the  arrival  of 
Englishmen  of  any  political  importance,  immediate 
notice  has  been  given  by  the  police,  and  the  hint  con- 
veyed to  certain  adherents  of  the  crown  to  treat  them 
with  hospitality,  and  to  twine  Austrian  corkscrews 
round  their  hearts. 

She  has  also  used  her  money  successfully  with  a 
portion  of  the  European  press.  Hence  the  blatant 
articles  we  have  read  upon  a  march  to  Paris.  At- 
tempts have  even  been  made  in  this  country,  but,  to 
the  honor  of  the  American  press,  no  editor  has  been 
found  willing  to  soil  his  hands  with  the  money  stolen 
from  the  orphans  of  Vienna. 

On  the  great  questions  of  the  day  the  English 
people  are  perfectly  sound,  but  the  foreign  policy  of 


49 


England  is  directed  by  men  who  care  but  little  for 
the  popular  sentiment;  who  decide  questions  neither 
by  rules  of  natural  right,  nor  by  the  dictates  of  a  far- 
seeing  statesmanship ;  and  who,  be  they  Tories  or 
Whigs,  have  a  devotion  to  Austria  so  blind  and  so 
infatuated,  that  it  can  only  be  disturbed  by  the  fear 
of  losing  their  places,  or  the  fear  of  bringing  upon 
England  a  great  calamity. 

I 

And  here  begin  our  duties  and  our  responsibilities. 
In  whatever  contest  ensues,  our  sympathies  should  be 
with  those  who  strive  for  their  natural  rights ;  with 

.  those  who  strive  to  imitate  us  in  what  we  have  done 
of  good ;  and  to  them  we  owe  all  the  aid  we  can 
give,  without  directly  plunging  into  the  contest. 

No  English  ministry  would  rashly  enter  into  a  war, 
which  promised  to  be  long  and  complicated,  without 
assuring  and  strengthening  its  friendly  relations  with 
the  United  States.  This  may  now  be  regarded  as  a 
rule  of  English  polity.  Let  us  make  the  English 
government  clearly  understand  that  in  no  case,  and 
in  no  form,  can  it  have  aid  from  us,  in  any  measure 
tending  to  uphold  the  house  of  Austria.  More,  let 
us  say  to  that  government,  that  in  such  a  course,  she 
shall  have,  at  all  times  —  and  in  every  manner,  short 
of  actual  war,  by  which  we  can  reach  her  —  our  de- 
termined hostility. 

Let  us  do  for  the  old  world  what  the  old  world  did 


50 


for  us  in  our  struggle  for  Independence.  Let  us,  in 
favor  of  the  right,  interpose  another  "  ARMED  NEU- 
TRALITY " —  a  neutrality  armed,  not  with  the  cannon  of 
Catharine,  but  with  the  printing  press  and  the  elec- 
tric light  of  truth.  And  the  mighty  public  opinion 
thus  created,  shall  come  to  aid  the  English  people  in 
keeping  their  rulers  in  the  path  of  duty,  of  justice, 
and  of  humanity. 

But  our  responsibilities  do  not  stop  here.  We  owe 
it  to  those  who  look  to  us  for  a  model,  we  owe  it  to 
ourselves,  to  give  them  an  example  of  good  govern- 
ment ;  of  a  government  which  at  all  times  and  in 
all  places  shall  be  true  to  the  memories  and  to  the  prin- 
ciples of  the  day  we  celebrate;  of  a  government 
free  from  corruption ;  and  so  well  balanced  as  never 
to  permit  the  encroachment  of  any  one  of  the  three 
great  branches  of  power  upon  the  legitimate  field 
of  another. 

We  have  already  seen  that,  even  a  century  ago  in 
France,  the  idea  of  civil  liberty  implied  an  independ- 
ent,, but  rigidly  responsible  judiciary,  and  a  complete 
separation  of  the  legislative,  executive  and  judicial 
functions. 

It  was  an  old  rule  of  the  Parliament  of  Paris  that 
no  member  of  that  court  should  go  to  the  Louvre,  or 
frequent  the  houses  of  princes  ;  and  in  England,  with- 
out there  being,  as  I  believe,  any  positive  rule,  custom 


51 


requires  that  the  puisne  judges  shall  never  go  to  the 
Court  of  the  Sovereign.  This  provision  is  one  of 
many  to  keep  the  judiciary  above  even  the  suspicion 
of  making  itself  an  instrument  for  despotism  in  the 
hands  of  the  executive. 

In  France,  where  the  theory  of  institutions  is  more 
closely  studied  than  in  England,  ample  provision  has 
been  also  made  to  prevent  any  usurpation  by  the 
judiciary  of  the  functions  of  the  legislature. 

One  of  the  most  ingenious  and  profound  of  modern 
authors  —  Jules  Simon — speaking  of  the  progress  in 
the  development  of  judicial  institutions,  even  in  coun- 
tries where  but  little  progress  has  been  made  in  other 
things,  says:  "If  placed  before  judges  a  thousand 
miles  from  home,  and  called  on  to  plead  a  cause,  I 
know  that  if  my  cause  be  just,  and  my  judges  be 
honest,  I  shall  win  it ;  and  this  because  the  great 
principles  which  regulate  the  conduct  of  judges  are 
everywhere  the  same."* 

Of  these  great  principles,  one  of  the  most  im- 
portant is  that  which  confines  the  judge  strictly  to 
the  case  and  point  before  him,  which  does  not  per- 
mit him  to  wander  from  that,  and  which  forbids 
him,  under  any  pretext,  to  make  of  the  judicial  bench 
a  tripod  or  a  stump. 

*  Le  Devoir,  par  Jules  Simon.  Simon,  like  Arago,  gave  up  lucrative 
places  under  the  French  government,  rather  than  swear  allegiance  to  a 
usurper.  He  has  just  been  nominated  to  the  chair  in  the  Institute,  made 
vaoant  by  the  death  of  de  Tocqueville. 


52 


"  An  opinion,"  said  Chief  Justice  Vaughan,  "  given 
in  court,  if  not  necessary  to  the  judgment  given  of 
record,  is  no  judicial  opinion ;  "*  and  Chief  Justice 
Willes  says,  "great  mischiefs  must  arise  from  judges 
giving  such  opinions."f 

The  great  legal  minds  of  France  have  spoken  with 
even  more  force.  "The  judge,"  say  they,  "is  neces- 
sarily confined  strictly  to  the  point  legally  brought 
before  him.  If  he  permit  himself,  even  with  good 
intentions,  to  wander  from  this  —  to  express  from  the 
bench  opinions  upon  other  matters  —  opinions  which 
it  is  true  would  have  no  judicial  value,  but  which 
might  have  an  effect  upon  timid  and  ignorant  minds 
— he  unfits  himself  for  the  office  of  a  judge.  He  throws 
away  the  impartiality  which  he  should  have  when  a 
point,  similar  to  that  which  he  has  discoursed  upon, 
comes  lawfully  before  him ;  and  he  encroaches  upon 
the  first  branch  of  the  sovereign  power — the  legis- 
lative—  all  which  is  inadmissible  in  a  well-organized 
society.''^ 

• 

*  Bole  v.  Horton,  Vaughan's  R.  382.  "  An  extra-judicial  opinion  given 
in  or  out  of  court  is  no  more  than  the  prolatum  or  saying  of  him  who  gives 
it,  nor  can  be  taken  as  his  opinion,  unless  everything  spoken  at  pleasure  must 
pass  as  the  speaker's  opinion." — Ibid. 

f  Willes,  666.     See  also  Ram,  On  Legal  Judgment,  22. 

J  See  the  debates  upon  the  adoption  of  the  Code  Napoleon  for  a  full  dis- 
cussion of  this  interesting  subject ;  also  Berryat  de  Saint-Prix,  Cours  de  Pro- 
ckdure  Civile ;  and  Meyer,  Origins  et  Progres  des  Institutions  Judiciaires  en 
Europe.     This  last  authority,  speaking  of  the  courts  of  civilized  states,  says 
"  Penetrated  with  the  truth  that  courts  are  established  in  order  to  bring  dif- 


53 


In  no  country  has  the  judiciary  been  more  con- 
stantly respected  than  in  our  own.  It  has  deserved 
respect,  for  it  has  respected  itself.  The  decisions  of 
Marshall,  of  Story,  and  of  Curtis  have  been  adopted  as 
law,  in  the  courts  of  other  countries.  The  severe 
criticisms  of  Jefferson  upon  the  Supreme  Court  of  the 
United  States  have  not  generally  been  concurred  in 
by  the  intelligent  mind  of  the  country.  He  charged 
that  court  with  arrogance,  and  with  having  both  the 
power  and  the  will  to  overturn  the  constitutional 
liberties  of  the  country.*  Upon  no  point  was  the 

ferences  to  an  end  ;  that  their  authority  is  based  only  on  the  requisition  of 
parties  who  implore  their  aid ;  that,  in  one  word,  judges  are  made  for 
pleaders,  and  not  pleaders  for  judges  ;  the  legislator  has  laid  down  the  prin- 
ciple that  the  judge  can  give  no  decision  or  opinion  except  upon  the  requisi- 
tion of  one  of  the  parties  to  a  suit,  and  in  the  limits  fixed  by  that  requisition. 
The  judge  is  free  to  grant  or  to  deny  what  is  asked  ;  to  ask  for  further  in- 
formation without  which  he  feels  unable  to  decide ;  to  allow  a  part  only  of 
what  is  asked ;  but  he  cannot  exceed  the  demand  made,  neither  in  quantity 
nor  in  quality.  .  .  .  The  judicial  power  is  by  its  very  nature  passive. 
He  who  holds  in  his  hands  the  balance  of  justice  cannot  lean  to  one  side 
without  causing  it  to  incline.  The  judge  who  agitates,  under  whatever 
motive  or  pretext,  cannot  be  impartial."  —  Meyer;  IV.,  527  et  seq. 

*  Jefferson  says,  in  1820:  "The  judiciary  of  the  United  States  is  the 
subtle  corps  of  sappers  and  miners  constantly  working  underground  to 
undermine  the  foundations  of  our  confederated  fabric.  They  are  construing 
our  Constitution  from  a  co-ordination  of  a  general  and  special  government 
to  a  general  and  supreme  one  alone.  This  will  lay  all  things  at  their  feet. 
.  .  .  Having  found,  from  experience,  that  impeachment  is  an  impractica- 
ble thing  —  a  mere  scarecrow  —  they  consider  themselves  secure  for  life ; 
they  skulk  from  responsibility  to  public  opinion,  the  only  remaining  hold  on 
them.  An  opinion  is  huddled  up  in  conclave,  perhaps  by  a  majority  of  one, 
delivered  as  if  unanimous,  and  with  the  silent  acquiescence  of  lazy  or  timid 
associates,  by  a  crafty  chief  judge,  who  sophisticates  the  law  to  his  mind  by 
the  turn  of  his  own  reasonipg."-^  Writings  of  Jefferson,  published  by  order  of 
Congress,  VII.,  192.  See  also  pp.  199,  216,  256,  278,  293.  321,  403. 


54 


great  father  of  American  democracy  more  earnest 
than  upon  this;  and  no  opinion  of  his  brought  upon 
him  more  severe  attacks  from  his  political  opponents. 
Hamilton,  in  earlier  days,  and  more  recently  the 
learned  Justice  Story,  insisted  on  the  other  hand, 
that  it  would  be  difficult  and  almost  impossible  for 
the  Supreme  Court  to  go  astray — that  the  cases  upon 
which  it  could  lawfully  act  were  strictly  limited,* 
and  Story  declared  that,  should  it  ever  exceed  its 
powers  or  make  a  wrong  decision,  the  enlightened 
public  opinion  of  the  country,  closely  watching  it, 
would  recall  it  to  a  sense  of  duty. 

A    recent    scene    in    the    Supreme    Court   of    the 
United  States  has  at  length  justified  the  forebodings 

*  Hamilton's  opinions  upon  the  limited  power  of  the  Supreme  Court  as 
laid  down  in  the  Federalist  are  further  developed  in  the  3d  and  4th  vols.  of 
the  History  of  the  Republic  by  his  son,  John  C.  Hamilton.  Story,  in  his 
Commentaries  on  the  Constitution,  §1777,  2d  edition,  says :  "  The  functions  of 
the  judges  of  the  courts  of  the  United  States  are  strictly  and  exclusively 
judicial.  They  cannot,  therefore,  be  called  upon  to  advise  the  president  in 
any  executive  measures,  or  to  give  extra-judicial  interpretations  of  law." 

Some  confusion  exists  in  the  popular  mind  from  the  often  repeated  asser- 
tion that  it  is  the  province  of  the  Supreme  Court  to  decide  all  constitutional 
questions.  Story  says :  "  The  court  can  take  cognizance  of  them  only  in 
a  suit  regularly  brought  before  it,  in  which  the  point  arises,  and  is  essential  to 
the  rights  of  one  of  the  parties."  Precisely  as  the  humblest  Justice  of  the 
Peace  would  do.  The  debates  in  the  Federal  Convention  show  the  exact 
meaning  attached  to  the  words  of  the  Constitution,  extending  the  judicial 
power  of  the  United  States  to  "  all  cases  arising  under  the  constitution,  laws, 
and  treaties  of  the  United  States."  Mr.  Madison  feared  that  this  might  be 
interpreted  to  mean  questions,  but  it  was  understood  that  the  power  given 
was  "  limited  to  cases  of  a  judicial  nature." — See  Madison's  debates,  Elliot 
V.,  483  ;  also  Curtis,  who  ably  discusses  this  point,  Commentaries  on  th? 
Jurisdiction  of  U.  S.  Courts,  I.,  95. 


of  Jefferson,  and  has  furnished  at  the  same  time  a 
serious  warning  to  all  who  prefer  a  government  based 
upon  law,  to  either  despotism  or  anarchy. 

The  case  of  Dred  Scott  was  the  occasion  taken 
by  certain  judges  of  the  Supreme  Court,  to  speak 
from  the  bench  on  matters  not  legally  before  them* 
—  on  matters  which  they  had  no  right  in  their  ju- 
dicial capacity  to  discourse  upon  —  which,  as  judges, 
they  could  not  touch  without  encroaching  upon  the 
functions  of  the  Legislature,  nor  as  individuals  with- 
out prostituting  the  dignity  of  their  office ;  convert- 
ing the  Temple  of  Justice  into  another  Tammany 
Hall,  and  the  Supreme  Bench  into  a  caucus-platform. 
And  one  of  these  harangues,  that  of  Mr.  Taney, 
was  but  a  short  time  after  seized  upon  by  the  Chief 
Executive  Magistrate  of  the  country,  treated  by  him 
as  a  decision,  and  made  the  justification  of  a  par- 
ticular line  of  policy ;  —  a  policy  tending  to  make 
labor  dishonorable  in  the  Territories  of  the  Republic.f 


*  "  Many  things  were  said  by  the  court  which  are  of  no  authority. 
Nothing  which  has  been  said  by  them,  which  has  not  a  direct  bearing  on  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  court,  against  which  they  decided,  can  be  considered  as 
authority.  /  shall  certainly  not  regard  it  as  such.  The  ques  ion  of  juris- 
diction being  before  the  court  was  decided  by  them  authoritatively,  but 
nothing  beyond  that  question." —  Justice  M'Lean,  in  Dred  Scott  v.  Snndford. 
Howard's  Reports,  XIX.  549. 

f  I  know  of  no  eminent  lawyer  in  the  country  who  has  sustained  the  dec- 
larations of  the  Chief  Justice  in  this  case.  It  has  been  asserted  that  the 
tormer  Attorney-General  of  the  United  States,  Mr.  Caleb  Cashing,  whose 
profound  learning  and  legal  sagacity  all  admit,  upholds  them ;  but  he  is  re- 


56 


To  the  honor  of  the  judiciary,  two  judges,  and 
they  the  most  learned  upon  the  bench,  were  found 
faithful  among  the  faithless.  Mr.  Justice  McLean,  after 

ported  to  have  said,  on  the  27th  February,  1858,  in  the  Legislature  of  Mas- 
sachusetts :  "  There  are  parts  of  the  opinion  of  the  court,  which  in  his 
opinion  could  not  be  sustained,"  and  then  to  have  commented  on  those  parts 
"  from  which  he  dissented."  (See  Legislative  debates  in  Boston  Daily  Adver- 
tiser, 1st  March,  1858.)  On  a  subsequent  day,  Mr.  Gushing  being  present, 
the  following  able  analysis  of  the  case  was  made  by  a  member  of  less  experi- 
ence but  of  equal  legal  acumen,  Mr.  John  A.  Andrew,  and  the  correctness 
of  this  analysis  has  never,  that  I  am  aware,  been  disproved  by  Mr.  Gushing. 
Mr.  Andrew  said : 

"  On  the  question  of  the  possibility  of  citizenship  to  one  of  Dred  Scott's  color,  extrac- 
tion and  origin,  three  justices,  viz.  Taney,  Wayne  and  Daniel,  held  the  negative.  Nelson 
and  Campbell  passed  over  the  plea  by  which  the  question  was  raised.  Grier  agreed  with 
Kelson.  Catron  said  the  question  was  not  open.  McLean  agreed  with  Catron,  but 
thought  the  plea  bad.  Curtis  agreed  that  the  question  was  open,  but  attacked  the  plea, 
met  its  averments,  and  decided  that  a  free-born  colored  person,  native  to  any  State,  it* 
a  citizen  thereof,  by  birth,  and  is  therefore  a  citizen  of  the  Union,  and  entitled  to  sue  in 
the  Federal  Courts.  But  three  judges  of  the  Supreme  Court  have,  as  yet,  judicially  denied 
the  capacity  of  citizenship  to  such  as  Dred  Scott  and  family. 

•'  Had  a  majority  of  the  court  directly  sustained  the  plea  in  abatement,  and  denied  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  Circuit  Court  appealed  from,  then  all  else  they  could  have  said  and 
done  would  have  been  done  and  said  in  a  cause  not  theirs  to  try  and  not  theirs  to  discuss. 
In  the  absence  of  such  majority,  one  step  more  was  to  be  taken.  And  the  next  step  reveals 
an  agreement  of  six  of  the  Justices,  on  a  point  decisive  of  the  cause,  and  putting  an  end  to 
all  the  functions  of  the  court. 

"  It  is  this.  Scott  was  first  carred  to  Rock  Island,  in  the  State  of  Illinois,  where  he  re- 
mained about  two  years,  before  going  with  his  master  to  Fort  Snelling,  in  the  Territory  of 
Wisconsin.  His  claim  to  freedom  was  rested  on  the  alleged  effect  of  his  translation  from 
a  slave  State,  and  again  into  a  free  Territory.  If,  by  his  removal  to  Illinois,  he  became 
emancipated  from  his  master,  the  subsequent  continuance  of  his  pilgrimage  into  the  Louis- 
iana purchase  could  not  add  to  his  freedom,  nor  alter  the  fact.  If,  by  reason  of  any  want 
or  infirmity  in  the  laws  of  Illinois,  or  of  conformity  on  his  part  to  their  behests,  Dred 
Scott  remained  a  slave  while  he  remained  in  that  State,  then  —  for  the  sake  of  learning 
the  effect  on  him  of  his  territorial  residence  beyond  the  Mississippi,  and  of  his  marriage 
and  other  proceedings  there  ;  and  the  effect  of  the  eojournment  and  marriage  of  Harriet, 
in  the  same  Territory,  upon  herself  and  her  children  — it  might  become  needful  to  advance 
one  other  step  into  the  investigation  of  the  law;  to  inspect  the  Missouri  Compromise,  ban- 
ishing slavery  to  the  south  of  the  line  of  36° 30'  in  the  Louisiana  purchase. 

"  But  no  exigency  of  the  cause  ever  demanded  or  justified  that  advance  ;  for  six  of  the 
Justices,  including  the  Chief  Justice  himself,  decided  that  the  status  of  the  plaintiff,  as  free 
or  slave,  was  dependent,  not  upon  the  laws  of  the  State  into  which  he  had  been,  but  of 
the  State  of  Missouri,  in  which  he  was  at  the  commencement  of  the  suit.  The  Chief  Justice 
asserted  that  '  it  is  now  h'rmly  settled  by  the  decisions  of  the  highest  court  in  the  State, 
that  Scott  and  his  family,  oil  their  return  were  not  free,  but  were,  by  the  laws  of  Mis- 
souri, the  property  of  the  defendant.'  This  was  the  burden  of  the  opinion  of  Nelson, 
who  declares  '  the  question  is  one  solely  depending  upon  the  law  of  Missouri,  and  that 


57 

showing  the  dangerous  novelty  of  the  conduct  of  the 
court ;  its  violation  of  precedent,  of  written  law,  and 
of  natural  right;  and  after  declaring  that  the  mere 
"sayings"  of  the  court  would  not  be  regarded  by 
him  as  authority,  expressed  his  regret  that  its  declara- 
tion of  a  year  before  (in  Pease  v.  Peck,  18  Howard) 
did  not  seem  to  be  fresh  in  the  minds  of  some  of 
his  brethren :  "  that  it  could  not  yield  its  convictions 

the  federal  Court  sitting  in  the  State,  and  trying  the  case  before  us.  was  bound  to  follow 
it.'  It  received  the  emphatic  endorsement  of  Wayne,  whose  general  concurrence  was 
with  the  Chief  Justice.  Grier  concurred  in  set  terms  with  Nelson  on  all  'the  questions 
discussed  by  him.'  Campbell  says,  'The  claim  of  the  plaintiff  to  freedom  depends  upon 
the  effect  to  be  given  to  his  absence  from  Missouri,  in  company  with  his  master  in  Illinois 
and  Minnesota,  and  this  effect  is  to  be  ascertained  by  reference  to  the  laws  of  Missouri.'1  Five 
of  the  Justices  then  (if  no  more  of  them)  regarded  the  law  of  Missouri  as  decisive  of  the 
plaintiffs  rights. 

"The  Chief  Justice  and  Justices  Wayne  and  Nelson  and  Grier  plainly  hold  that,  on  this 
point,  the  Court  of  the  United  States  were  bound  to  follow  the  decision  of  the  Court  of 
Missouri,  which  had  already  passed  upon  the  question.  And  if  Campbell  did  not  intend 
to  be  bound  by  the  Missouri  Court,  we  are  at  a  loss  to  understand  what  he  does  mean  ; 
since,  asking  '  what  is  the  law  of  Missouri  in  such  a  case?'  and,  after  citing  Scott  v.  Em- 
erson in  the  15th  of  the  Missouri  Reports  and  various  authorities  of  several  States,  he  con- 
cludes that  '  questions  of  status  are  closely  connected  with  questions  arising  out  of  the 
social  and  political  organization  of  the  State  where  they  originate,  and  each  sovereign 
power  must  determine  them  within  its  own  territories.'  He  held  conclusively  and  distinctly, 
and  so  also  did  Mr.  Justice  Catron,  in  common  with  all  the  judges,  besides  McLean  and 
Curtis,  —  on  their  own  investigation  and  reasoning,  —  that  the  law  of  Missouri  (to  be 
ascertained  either  by  themselves,  or  by  exploring  the  declared  opinion  of  the  Courts,) 
must  rule  the  cause.  And  they  all  affirm  that,  irrespective  of  the  law  of  lUinois  and  of  the 
territory,  Scott  was  a  slave  by  the  law  of  Missouri,  on  his  return  within  the  confines  of 
its  jurisdiction. 

"  If  the  law  of  Illinois  could  have  had  no  possible  effect  to  secure  freedom  to  Scott, 
when  again  remitted  to  Missouri,  it  follows  that  neither  could  the  laws  of  the  territory 
have  availed  him.  The  majority  of  the  court  had  no  occasion,  therefore,  to  follow  them 
into  the  territory,  in  order  to  look  into  the  condition  of  Harriet  and  the  children ;  because 
Dred,  as  a  slave,  could  have  no  wife  nor  child,  known  to  the  law  or  recognized  by  the 
Court.  But  if  any  such  occasion  had  existed,  the  same  answer,  —  of  the  effect  of  the  Mis- 
souri law,  —  was  sufficient  to  control  the  cause. 

"  Here,  then,  we  have  a  man,  found  by  three  of  the  Court,  to  be  a  person  impossible  to 
be  a  citizen,  by  reason  of  ancestral  disabilities;  by  the  same  three,  and  four  more  of  them, 
to  have  been  a  slave,  by  the  law  of  his  domicil  at  the  inception  of  the  suit.  And  yet,  on 
the  strength  of  observations  and  reflections  indulged  by  a  majority  of  these  gentlemen, 
after  their  judicial  functions  had  ceased  for  want  of  a  competent  plaintiff  in  the  suit  —  for 
want  of  a  man  competent  to  the  ownership  of  his  own  body,  (on  one  side  of  their  record,) 
—  it  is  claimed  by  the  President  of  the  United  States,  that  slavery  '  exists  in  Kansas  under 
the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,'1  and  that  this  point  has  been  declared  by  thf  highest  tribu- 
nal known  to  our  laws.1  " 


58 


where,  after  a  long  course  of  consistent  decisions, 
some  new  light  suddenly  springs  up,  or  an  excited 
public  opinion  has  elicited  new  doctrines  subversive  of 
former  safe  precedent."  * 

Mr.  Justice  Curtis  declared  that,  without  violating 
duty,  he  could  not  follow  Mr.  Taney  in  discussing 
matters  not  before  the  court ;  and,  true  to  judicial 
principles,  said,  "  he  did  not  hold  the  opinion  of  that 
court,  or  any  court  binding,  when  expressed  on  a 
question  not  legitimately  before  it."  He  did  not 
fail,  however,  thoroughly  to  examine  the  question 
before  the  court,  and  showed  that  upon  that,  the 
opinion  of  Mr.  Chief  Justice  Taney  was  as  illegal  as 
was  the  demagogical  harangue  of  Mr.  Taney  on 
matters  not  before  the  court,  f 

The  Chief  Justice  had  declared  that,  "  every  per- 
son, and  every  class  and  description  of  persons,  who 
were  at  the  time  of  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution 
recognized  as  citizens  in  the  several  States,  became 

*  Howard  XIX.,  563. 

fin  the  trial  of  Woodfall,  the  printer  of  Junius,  the  aberrations  of  the 
Chief  Justice  —  less  flagrant  by  far  than  those  in  the  Dred  Scott  case  — 
were,  it  will  be  remembered,  the  object  of  discussion  in  the  House  of  Lords, 
where  Lord  Chatham,  on  the  llth  of  December,  1770,  said:  "  The  court 
are  so  confined  to  the  record  that  they  cannot  take  notice  of  anything  that 
does  not  appear  on  the  face  of  it ;  in  the  legal  phrase  they  cannot  travel  out 
of  the  record.  The  noble  judge  did  travel  out  of  the  record ;  and  I  affirm 
that  his  discourse  was  irregular,  extra-judicial,  and  unprecedented.  His 
apparent  motive  for  doing  what  he  knew  to  be  wrong,  was  that  he  might  have 
an  opportunity  of  telling  the  public  extra-judicially  "  certain  things,  which 
Chatham  proceeds  to  develop. — Woodfall's  Junius,  I.,  29. 


59 


also  citizens  of  this  new  political  body."  *  He  as- 
serted, however,  that  the  free  descendants  of  imported 
Africans  "  were  at  that  time  (viz.,  in  1787)  considered 
as  a  subordinate  and  inferior  class  of  beings,"  having 
no  natural  rights  ;f  that  "  they  had  for  more  than  a 
century  before  been  regarded  as  beings  ...  so  far 
inferior  that  they  had  no  rights  which  the  white 
man  was  bound  to  respect ; "  J  that  "  this  was  an 
axiom  in  morals  as  well  as  in  politics  ;  "  —  from  which 
premises  he  declared  that  they  were  not  then  citi- 
zens in  the  States  (passing  over  in  utter  silence  the 
statutes  of  several  States  prior  to  1787,  which  made 
them  citizens),  and  could  not,  therefore,  be  then,  nor 
afterwards,  citizens  of  the  United  States.§ 

Well  did  Mr.  Justice  Curtis  overthrow  this  mon- 
strous assertion,  by  pointing  to  the  laws  of  five  States, 
among  them  North  Carolina,  which,  in  1787,  gave  to 

*  Howard  XIX.,  406. 

f  "  No  rights  or  privileges  but  such  as  those  who  held  the  power  and  the 
government  might  grant  them." — C.  J.  Taney,  in  Howard  XIX.,  405. 

t  Howard  XIX.,  407. 

§  This  paragraph  is  the  careful  condensation  of  twenty-four  pages  of 
casuistry  in  the  official  report  of  the  opinion  of  the  court. — Ibid,  403-427. 
The  marginal  summary  of  the  official  reporter  stands  thus :  "  When  the 
Constitution  was  adopted,  they  [i,  e.,  freemen  of  the  African  race,  whose 
ancestors  were  brought  to  this  country  and  sold]  were  not  regarded  in  any 
of  the  States  as  members  of  the  community  which  constituted  the  State,  and 
were  not  numbered  among  its  '  people  or  citizens '  ;  consequently  the  special 
rights  and  immunities  guaranteed  to  citizens  do  not  apply  to  them.  And, 
not  being  'citizens'  within  the  meaning  of  the  Constitution,  they  are  not 
entitled  to  sue  in  that  character  in  a  court  of  the  United  States/'— Ibid,  393. 


60 


free  colored  men  the  full  rights  of  citizens,  enforcing 
this  by  the  decision  of  Judge  Gaston,  of  North  Caro- 
lina. He  also  cited  the  Articles  of  Confederation  of 
1778,  the  fourth  of  which  declared  the  "free  in- 
habitants of  each  of  these  States  entitled  to  all  the 
privileges  and  immunities  of  free  citizens  in  the 
several  States  ;  "  he  showed  by  the  discussions  in  Con- 
gress at  the  time,  that  the  question  was  then  thoroughly 
understood ;  and  pointed  out  the  efforts  of  South 
Carolina  to  so  amend  this  article  as  to  restrict  citi- 
zenship to  whites,  efforts  in  which  only  one  of  the 
thirteen  States  joined  her.*  Mr.  Justice  Curtis  might 
also  have  cited  the  statute  of  Virginia  of  1783,  which 
declares  that  all  freemen  are  citizens,  and  which  re- 
peals the  law  of  1779,  that  limited  citizenship  to 
whites. 

Carrying  the  opinion  of  the  Chief  Justice  to  its 
logical  result,  Mr.  Justice  Curtis  showed  that  it  im- 
plied the  power  to  change  our  Republic  to  "an  oli- 
garchy, in  whose  hands  would  be  concentrated  the 
entire  power  of  the  Federal  Government." 

Against  doctrines  and  conduct  so  destructive  to 
our  free  institutions,  it  behoves  us  all,  on  this  day, 
solemnly  to  protest.  On  this  day  again,  it  behoves 
us  to  remember,  that  an  injury  done  to  the  humblest 
among  us,  whatever  his  color,  whatever  the  country 
of  his  birth,  is  an  injury  done  to  us  all. 

*  Howard  XIX.,  572-5. 


61 

All  who  believe  in  natural  rights,  and  all  who 
uphold  existing  things,  are  here  called  upon  to  act. 
In  presence  of  usurpation,  it  becomes  most  especially 
the  duty  of  all  conservative  men  of  the  country  to 
come  forward. 

I  honor  the  conservative  who  stands  the  guardian 
of  order,  of  existing  rights,  and  of  instituted  liberty, 
and  who  gracefully  yields  at  last  to  the  progress  of 
an  advancing  civilization  : 

"  Who  serves  the  right,  and  yields  to  right  alone." 

But  there  are  some  who,  calling  themselves  conser- 
vatives, conserve  nothing,  and  who  yield,  not  to  the 
advances  of  civilization,  but  to  the  encroachments  of 
barbarism ;  whose  whole  conservatism  is  constant  con- 
cession ;  who  tell  us  they  are  "  as  much  opposed  to 
barbarism  as  any  one,"  but  they  wouldn't  meet  it  on 
the  field  of  politics,  —  "as  much  opposed  to  crime 
as  any  one,"  but  they  wouldn't  hear  a  warning  voice 
raised  against  it  from  the  pulpit;  —  their  politics  are 
too  pure,  their  Sunday  slumbers  too  precious,  to  be 
disturbed  by  any  allusions  to  such  exciting  matters 
as  the  advances  of  crime.  And  so  they  go  on,  con- 
ceding everything,  —  not  to  civilization,  but  to  bar- 
barism, —  not  to  liberty,  but  to  liberticide  —  backing 
down  before  every  presumptuous  aggression — down — 
and  down  still  —  until  they  fall  among  the  lost  ones 


62 

whom   Dante   has  described.*      From   them   there    is 
nothing  to  expect. 

"  Non  ragionam  di  lor,  ma  guarda  e  passa." 

We  have,  however,  among  us  some  real  conserva- 
tives, and  many  intelligent  and  worthy  men,  who 
neglect  the  privileges,  shall  I  not  say  the  duties,  of 
citizenship,  and  who,  either  from  indifference  or  from 
a  false  fastidiousness,  abstain  from  the  polls.  To 
these  men  I  would,  on  this  occasion,  specially  appeal. 
You  complain  that  your  vote  is  only  that  of  one, 
and  that  however  great  your  intelligence,  however 
profound  your  learning,  it  may  all  be  outweighed 
by  the  vote  of  the  most  simple.  Here  then  is  an 
opportunity  for  effective  action ;  here  is  the  occasion 
foreseen  by  the  sagacious  Story,  when  he  placed  the 
security  against  a  trespass  by  the  Supreme  Court 
upon  the  known  principles  of  law,  in  the  intelli- 
gence, the  integrity,  the  learning  and  the  manliness 
of  the  country,  which  would  keep  watch  upon  its 
proceedings. 

Here  you  may  exercise  your  knowledge,  and  the 

*  " Master, 


What  wretched  souls  are  these  in  anguish  drowned  ? " 

To  which  he  answered,  "  This  award  severe 
On  those  unhappy  spirits  is  bestowed, 

Of  whom  nor  infamy  nor  good  was  known, 
Joined  with  that  wicked  crew  which  unto  God 

Nor  false  nor  faithful,  served  themselves  alone." 

Inferno :  Canto  III.,  Parsons'?  Trans. 


63 

influence  which  it  may  carry  with  it.  Bring  that 
knowledge  and  influence  to  bear  upon  the  judges 
who  have  acquiesced  in  that  deplorable  prostitution 
of  their  office ;  aid  them  to  see  the  error  of  their 
ways;  point  out  to  them  the  fountains  of  that  law 
of  which  they  are  the  ministers ;  draw  them  gently 
back  to  an  appreciation  of  those  elementary  principles 
of  jurisprudence,  and  of  judicial  action,  which  seem 
to  have  passed  from  their  memories;  furnish  the 
Chief  Justice  with  a  copy  of  the  decisions  of  North 
Carolina  and  of  the  statutes  of  Virginia  ;*  persuade 
him  to  read  the  history  of  his  country ;  tell  them  all, 
not  in  anger  but  in  sorrow,  of  the  disastrous  conse- 
quences of  their  example ;  show  to  them  that  what- 
ever factitious  popularity  may  follow  their  conduct, 
the  wise  and  the  good  are  not  with  them,  and  that — 
though  they  may  have  a  Senate  at  their  heels  ready 
to  print  and  circulate  their  opinions  through  the  coun- 
try at  the  public  expense — the  voices  of  all  the  true 
and  enlightened  will  condemn  them  in  the  present, 


*  Particularly  the  llth  volume  of  "  Hening's  Virginia  Statutes,"  where 
on  p.  322  maybe  found  the  law  of  October,  1783,  which  repeals  that  of 
1779,  limiting  citizenship  to  whites,  and  which  enacts,  "That  all  free  per- 
sons, born  within  the  territory  of  this  Commonwealth  shall  be  deemed  citi- 
zens of  this  Commonwealth."  To  this  might  be  joined  the  opinion  of  the 
learned  Judge  Gaston,  of  North  Carolina,  (4  Dev.  and  Bat.  20),  cited  by 
Justice  Curtis  (19  Howard.  573)  :  "  All  free  persons  born  within  the  State 
are  born  citizens  of  the  State.  It  is  a  matter  of  universal  notoriety,  that 
under  the  Constitution  of  North  Carolina,  free  persons,  without  regard  to 
color,  claimed  and  exercised  the  franchise." 


64 


and  the  Muse  of  History  chronicle  their  names  in  the 
black  catalogue  of  unworthy  judges. 

And  if  with  all  this  you  find  them  deaf  to  your 
remonstrances,  unwilling  to  purify  the  ermine  which, 
confided  to  them,  has  been  draggled  and  soiled,  if, 
unconscious  of 

" their  foul  disfigurement, 

They  boast  themselves  more  comely  than  before," 

you  will  at  least  have  the  satisfaction  of  knowing  that 
you  have  done  something  to  serve  your  country. 

But  this  conduct  of  the  court,  though  at  first  it 
may  most  shock  the  student  of  history,  and  the  jurist, 
conversant  with  those  principles  which  through  the 
long  struggle  between  arbitrary  power  and  right  have 
been  evolved  as  the  guaranties  of  justice  between 
man  and  man,  this  usurpation  on  the  part  of  the  ju- 
diciary comes  home  to  every  one ;  to  the  rich  as 
well  as  to  the  poor;  to  the  powerful  as  well  as  to 
the  weak ;  to  the  wise  as  well  as  to  the  simple ; 
to  the  white  as  well  as  to  the  black. 

To-day  liberty  is  attacked ;  to-morrow  it  may  be 
property.  Let  this  be  calmly  acquiesced  in,  and  no 
interest  however  respectable,  no  right  however  sacred, 
is  safe.  In  opposition  to  the  monstrous  conduct  of 
these  judges  all  of  us  may  cordially  unite :  in  this  all 
shades  of  party  may  blend ;  for  no  party,  however 
strong  it  may  appear,  however  great  the  selfish  in- 


65 


terests  it  may  suppose  to  be  Mattered,  no  party  can 
long  bear  up  under  the  opprobrium  of  a  measure 
which  tends  to  undermine  our  institutions;  which 
destroys  the  harmonious  balance  of  the  power  dele- 
gated by  the  people  to  different  branches  of  their 
government,  and  leads  logically  on  to  despotism  or 
to  revolution. 

Let  us,  therefore,  all  join  our  efforts  to  restore  the 
purity  of  the  judiciary,  —  to  aid  it  to  recover  its  self- 
respect  ;  and  having  done  this,  let  us  prove  that  our 
celebration  of  this  day  is  no  mere  empty  show,  by 
honoring  the  immortal  truths  of  the  Declaration,  and 
by  earnestly  endeavoring  in  the  future  to  act  up  to 
them.  Let  us  rally  around  the  Constitution  of  our 
country,  which  guarantees  trial  by  jury  to  all,  and 
which,  in  its  own  words,  was  "ordained  to  establish 
justice,  and  secure  the  blessings  of  liberty ; "  let  us 
drive  far  away  the  corruption  in  power,  and  make 
JUSTICE  and  LIBERTY  the  persistent  rule  of  action  of 
our  government. 

Then  shall  we  offer  an  acceptable  tribute  to  the 
memory  of  those  who  founded  our  Republic ;  then 
shall  our  country  present  a  cheering  example  to  other 
nations  struggling  with  oppression ;  then,  true  to  it- 
self, it  shall  be  stationed, 

* 

"  Like,  a  beneficent  star  for  all  to  gaze  at, 
So  high  and  glowing,  that  kingdoms  tar  and  foreign, 
Shall  by  it  read  their  destiny." 

9 


THE  DINNER  AT  FANEUIL   HALL. 


AFTER  the  Oration,  the  City  Authorities  and  their 
guests  dined  in  Faneuil  Hall.  From  the  official 
account  of  the  ceremonies  of  the  day,  are  extracted 
the  following  remarks  made  at  the  dinner  by  a  guest 
of  the  City,  Mr.  Palfrey,  of  New  Orleans,  and  by  Mr. 
Sumner. 

Mr.  PALFREY,  having  been  called  upon  by  the  Mayor 
to  reply  to  the  sixth  regular  sentiment,  among  other 
things,  said  : 

"It  is  peculiarly  a  hard  case  for  a  mail  who  has  been  a 
citizen  of  the  South  for  fifty  years,  who  is  an  American 
citizen,  and  enjoys  the  protection  of  the  Stars  and  Stripes, 
to  return  to  his  native  city  and  hear  such  sentiments  pro- 
mulgated as  I  have  been  obliged  to  listen  to  in  the  Music 
Hall  to-day." 

The  seventh  regular  sentiment,  given  by  the  Mayor, 
immediately  after  this,  was  — 

The  Orator  of  the  Day  —  His  eloquent  address  adds  fresh  laurels  to 
the  name  of  Sumner,  already  twice  distinguished  by  his  father  and 
brother  on  the  roll  of  the  orators  of  Boston. 

Mr.  GEORGE  SUMNER,  being  called  upon  by  the 
Mayor,  responded  as  follows : 


"  I  am  deeply  grateful,  Mr.  Mayor  and  Fellow-Citizens,  for 
the  manner  in  which  this  sentiment  has  been  received,  as 
it  shows  that  the  memory  of  my  honored  father,  and  the 
name  of  my  absent  brother,  are  fresh  in  your  minds.  The 
allusion  to  my  father  gratifies  not  alone  my  filial  feelings, 
but  those  which  I  have  as  a  citizen  of  Boston,  glad  to  see 
honor  rendered  to  every  example  of  integrity,  justice  and 
patriotism.  You  have  spoken  of  him  as  one  of  the  ora- 
tors of  Boston.  May  I  be  permitted  to  recall  an  occasion 
(not  the  fourth  of  July)  on  which,  as  it  seems  to  me,  he 
spoke  also  for  Boston,  and  with  a  certain  eloquence. 

"In  1812,  the  dominant  interest  of  our  city  was  strongly 
opposed  to  a  war  with  England.  At  that  time,  a  call  was 
made  for  a  national  loan,  and  subscription  books  were 
sent  to  Boston.  These  were  received  in  no  compliment- 
ary manner.  In  that  street  which  witnessed  the  first  con- 
flict between  British  troops  and  American  citizens,  it  was 
stated  that  no  money  would  be  given  in  Boston  —  and, 
moreover,  that  any  one  who  subscribed  to  the  loan  should 
be  stigmatized.  These  menaces  had  their  effect.  Days 
rolled  on,  no  money  came,  and  the  jeers  of  the  street 
were  redoubled.  At  that  moment,  my  father,  then  a  young 
lawyer,  sold  some  property,  got  together  what  money  he 
could  command,  paid  it  to  the  agent  of  the  national  trea- 
sury, and  put  his  name,  solitary  and  alone,  upon  the  stig- 
matized list. 

"  Two  days  after,  the  impulsive,  warm-hearted,  civic  hero 
of  our  Revolution,  in  whom  the  spirit  of  party  never  rose 
superior  to  patriotism,  the  venerable  John  Adams,  came 
from  Quincy  and  put  his  name  also  on  the  list. 

"  The  subscription  of  my  father  was  not  large  —  it  was 
the  young  lawyer's  mite  —  but  in  standing  forward  when 
the  national  honor  had  been  attacked,  and  in  doing  a 
patriotic  act,  in  presence  of  menace,  there  was  a  civic 
courage,  which  I  may,  perhaps,  be  pardoned  for  remember- 


60 


ing  with  a  certain  satisfaction.  On  that  occasion,  it  seems 
to  me  that  he  was  the  real  orator  of  Boston,  speaking  by 
action,  not  perhaps  the  dominant  or  the  fashionable  sen- 
timent of  the  moment,  but  the  sober  second-thought  of 
this  great  city ;  which  is  always  true  to  the  national  honor, 
and  true  to  the  principles  of  the  founders  of  the  Republic. 

'•  I  shall  not  follow  the  gentleman  who  has  just  preceded 
me  in  any  discussion.  This  is  Faneuil  Hall,  and  this  is 
the  City  of  Boston.  I  congratulate  him  on  being  where 
every  man  is  free  to  express  his  opinions.  In  so  much 
of  what  I  have  had  the  honor  to  say  this  day  in  another 
place,  as  regards  recent  events  in  our  own  country.  I  am 
supported  by  Jefferson,  by  Hamilton,  by  Story,  and  by 
the  great  jurist  of  Louisiana,  Edward  Livingston.  With 
them  I  am  content  to  stand  or  fall. 

"  In  every  part  of  Europe,  but  more  especially  in  France, 
I  have  remarked,  Mr.  Mayor,  the  honor  paid  to  our  native 
city.  Landing  at  Boulogne,  I  found  myself  passing  through 
the  rue  de  Boston  ;  and  in  two  other  cities  of  France  found 
the  dear  old  name  upon  street  corners.  This  honor  is  thus 
rendered  on  account  of  the  example  given  by  Boston  in 
her  sacrifices  for  liberty ;  and  because  she  has  always 
recognized  the  necessity  of  basing  her  liberty  firmly  upon 
law ;  and  an  the  guaranty  of  this,  of  keeping  the  legislative, 
executive  and  judicial  functions  separated  from  each  other. 

"Permit  me,  sir,  to  propose  as   a  sentiment: 

"  The  City  of  Boston  —  The  first  to  make  sacrifices  for  the  liberties 
of  the  whole  country ;  the  firmest  in  maintaining  the  UNION  formed 
to  secure  the  blessings  of  LIBEKTY  to  all." 


